Skip to main content

Full text of "The Republic"

See other formats



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2008 with funding from 
Andrew W. Mellon Foundation platuoft 



EDITED BY J y) fj 
#T. E. PAGE, ou., urrp. ff ~! | 
E. CAPPS, pu.p., Lu.p. W. H. D. ROUSE, u1rz.p. 




PAUL SHOREY, Px.D., LL.D., Lrrr.D. 




- Ser oryauten nes hike 
; pie (ate fet RENSS ae 

aad hoot aee 

ba _ 

‘ . nn! 
4 hare eh Se ec ts oe oe or 


The Text . . 
The Translation . ; 
Book I. ‘ 

Boox II. : ‘ : : . : 
Book III, ; ; ‘ . . 
Boox IV, . . ° : 

Book V. ‘ 

fy . 


Anatyses of the Republic abound.* The object of 
this sketch is not to follow all the windings of its 
ideas, but to indicate sufficiently their literary frame- 
work and setting. Socrates speaks in the first person, 
as in the Charmides and the Lysis. He relates to 
Critias, Timaeus, Hermocrates, and an unnamed 
fourth person, as we learn from the introduction of 
the Timaeus, a conversation which took place “ yester- 
_ day” at the Peiraeus. The narrative falls on the 
day of the Lesser Panathenaea, and its scene, like 
that of the Timaeus, Proclus affirms to be the city 
or the Acropolis, a more suitable place, he thinks, 
for the quieter theme and the fit audience but few 
than the noisy seaport, apt symbol of Socrates’ 
contention with the sophists.® 

The Timaeus, composed some time later than the 
Republic, is by an afterthought represented as its 

* Jowett, Dialogues of Plato, vol. iii. pp. xvi-clvii ; Grote’s 
Plato, vol. ivy. pp. 1-94: Gomperz, Greek Thinkers, iii. pp. 
54-105; William Boyd, An Introduction to the Republic of 
Plato, London, 1904, pp. 196 ff.; Richard Lewis Netileship, 
Lectures on the Republic of Plato, London, 1904; Ueberweg- 
Praechter, Geschichte der Philosophie, Altertum, pp. 231-234 
. and 269-279 ; Wilamowitz, Platon?, i. pp. 393-449 ; etc. 

> Cf. Proclus, In Rem P. vol. i. p. 17. 3 Kroll. Cf. also 
Laws, 705 a. 

VOL. I 6 Vii 


sequel. And the Republic, Timaeus, and unfinished 
Critias constitute the first of the “ trilogies”’ in 
which Aristophanes of Byzantium arranged the 
Platonic dialogues.¢ The Timaeus accordingly opens 
with a brief recapitulation of the main political and 
social features of the Republic. But nothing can be 
inferred from the variations of this slight summary.? 

The dramatic date of the dialogue is plausibly 
assigned by Boeckh¢ to the year 411 or 410.4 Proof 
is impossible because Plato admits anachronisms in 
his dramas.°® 

Socrates tells how he went down to the Peiraeus 
to attend the new festival of the Thracian Artemis, 
Bendis,’ and, turning homewards, was detained by 

* Cf. Diogenes Laertius, iii. 61, and Zeller, Philosophie 
der Griechen’, vol. ii. pt. i. pp. 494 f., n. 2. 

® Proclus tries to show that the points selected for em- 
phasis are those which prefigure the constitution and govern- 
ment of the universe by the Creator (Jn Tim. 17 £-¥r). His 
reasoning is differently presented but hardly more fantastic 
than that of modern critics who endeavour to determine by 
this means the original design or order of publication of the 
parts of the Republic. Cf. further Taylor, Plato, p. 264, n. 2. 

° Kleine Schriften, iv. pp. 437 ff., especially 448. 

4 A. E. Taylor, Plato, p. 263, n. 1, argues that this is the 
worst of all possible dates. 

* Cf. Jowett and Campbell, vol. iii. pp. 2-3; Zeller, 
vol. ii. pt. i. p. 489. Arguments are bas Rs the circum- 
stances of the family of Lysias, the presumable age of 
Socrates, Glaucon, Adeimantus and Thrasymachus, and the 
extreme old age of Sophocles. 

? The religion of Bendis may have been known at Athens 
as early as Cratinus’s Thraittai (443 8.c.), Kock, Fragmenta, 
i. 34. Mommsen, Feste der Stadt Athen, p. 490, cites 
inscriptions to prove its establishment in Attica as early as 
429-428 x.c. But he thinks Plato’s “ inasmuch as this was 
the first celebration *’ may refer to special ceremonies first 
instituted circa 411 B.c, 



a group of friends who took him to the house of 
Polemarchus, brother of the orator Lysias.?. A goodly 
company was assembled there, Lysias and a younger 
brother Euthydemus—yea, and Thrasymachus of 
Chalcedon,’ Charmantides of the deme Paiania,¢ 
Cleitophon,? and conspicuous among them the 
venerable Cephalus, crowned from a recent sacrifice 

and a prefiguring type of the happy old age of the 
just man.¢ A conversation springs up which Socrates 

guides to an inquiry into the definition and nature 
of justice (330 p, 331 c, 332 8) and to the conclusion 
that the conventional Greek formula, “ Help your 
friends and harm your enemies,” cannot be right 
(335 £-336 a), since it is not the function (€pyov, 335 p) 
of the good man to do evil to any. The sophist 

* See Lysias in any classical dictionary. He returned to 
Athens from Thurii cirea 412 s.c. Polemarchus was the older 
brother. He was a student of philosophy (Phaedr. 257 8). 
Whether he lived with Cephalus or Cephalus with him cannot 
be inferred with certainty. Lysias perhaps had a separate 
house at the Peiraeus (cf. Phaedr. 227 8). The family owned 
three houses in 404 s.c. (Lysias, Or. 12. 18),and Blass ( Attische 
Beredsamkeit, i. p. 347) infers from Lysias, 12. 16 that Polem- 
archus resided at Athens. Lysias takes no part in the 
conversation. He was no philosopher (Phaedr. 257 pz). 

> A noted sophist and rhetorician. Cf. Phaedr. 266 c, 
Zeller®, i. pp. 1321 ff.; Blass, Attische Beredsamkeit*, i. pp. 
244-258; Sidgwick, Journ. of Phil. (English), v. pp. 78-79, 
who denies that Thrasymachus was, properly speaking, a 
sophist; Diels, Fragmente’*, ii. pp. 276-282. 

© Blass, op. cit. ii. p. 19. 

# Apparently a partisan of Thrasymachus. His name is 
given to a short, probably spurious, dialogue, of which the 
main thought is that Socrates, though excellent in exhorta- 
tion or protreptic, is totally lacking in a positive and 
coherent philosophy. Grote and others have conjectured it 
to be a discarded introduction to the Republic. 

* Cf. 329 p, 331 a with 613 B-c. 



Thrasymachus, intervening brutally (336 8), affirms 
the immoralist thesis that justice is only the advantage 
of the (politically) stronger, and with humorous 
dramatic touches of character-portrayal is finally 
silenced (350 c-p), much as Callicles is refuted in the 
Gorgias. The conclusion, in the manner of the minor 
dialogues, is that Socrates knows nothing (354c). 
For since he does not know what justice is, he cannot 
a fortiori determine the larger question raised b 
Thrasymachus’s later contention (352 p), whether the 
just life or the unjust life is the happier. 

Either the first half or the whole of this book 
detached would be a plausible companion to such 
dialogues as the Charmides and Laches, which deal 
in similar manner with two other cardinal virtues, 
temperance and bravery. It is an easy but idle 
and unverifiable conjecture that it was in Plato’s 
original intention composed as a separate work, 
perhaps a discarded sketch for the Gorgias, and only 
by an afterthought became an introduction for the 
Republic. It is now an excellent introduction and 
not, in view of the extent of the Republic, dis- 
proportionate in length. That is all we know or 
can know. 

The second book opens with what Mill describes 
as a ‘‘ monument of the essential fairness of Plato’s 
mind ”’ ’—a powerful restatement of the theory of 
Thrasymachus by the brothers of Plato, Glaucon 
and Adeimantus. They are not content with the 
dialectic that reduced Thrasymachus to silence (358 B). 
They demand a demonstration which will convince 
the youth hesitating at the cross-roads of virtue and 

@ Cf. infra, p. xxv, note 6. 
» Cf. Dissertations and Discussions, vol. iv. p. 311. 


vice (365 a-B) * that it is really and intrinsically better 
to be than to seem just.? 

It is Plato’s method always to restate a satirized 
and controverted doctrine in its most plausible form 
before proceeding to a definitive refutation.° As he 
himself says in the Phaedrus (272 c), “ it is right to 
give the wolf too a hearing.” 

It is also characteristic of Plato that he prefers to 
put the strongest statement of the sophistic, im- 
moralist, Machiavellian, Hobbesian, Nietzschean 
political ethics in the mouths of speakers who are 
themselves on the side of the angels.¢ There is this 
historical justification of the procedure, that there 
exists not a shred of evidence that any contemporary 
or predecessor of Plato could state any of their 
theories which he assailed as well, as fully, as 
coherently, as systematically, as he has done it for 

In response to the challenge of Glaucon and 
Adeimantus, Socrates proposes to study the nature 
of justice and injustice writ large in the larger 
organism of the state, and to test the conceptions 
so won by their application to the individual also 
(368 £, 3694). Plato, though he freely employs 

* Cf. my Unity of Plato's Thought, p. 25, n. 164. 

> Cf. 362 a with 367 £. 

* Cf. my Unity of Plato's Thought, p. 8: “*. .. the 
elaborate refutations which Plato thinks fit to give of the 
crudest form of hostile theories sometimes produce an 
impression of unfairness upon modern critics. They forget 
two things: First, that he always goes on to restate the 
theory and refute its fair meaning ; second, that in the case 
of many doctrines combated by Plato there is no evidence 
that they were ever formulated with the proper logical 

qualifications except by himself.” 
@ Cf. 368 a-s. 



metaphor, symbolism, and myth, never bases his 
argument on them.* The figurative language here, 
as elsewhere, serves as a transition to, a framework 
for, an illustration of, the argument. Man is a social 
and political animal, and nothing but abstract 
dialectics can come of the attempt to isolate his 
psychology and ethics from the political and social 
environment that shapes them.’ The question 
whether the main subject of the Republic is justice 
or the state is, as Proclus already in effect said, a 
logomachy.® The construction of an ideal state was 
a necessary part of Plato’s design, and actually 
occupies the larger part of the Republic. But it is, 
as he repeatedly tells us, logically subordinated to 
the proof that the just is the happy life.¢ 

It is idle to object that it is not true and cannot 
be proved that righteousness is verifiably happiness. 
The question still interests humanity, and Plato’s 
discussion of it, whether it does or does not amount 
to a demonstration, still remains the most instructive 
and suggestive treatment of the theme in all literature. 

There is little profit also in scrutinizing too curiously 
the unity or lack of unity of design in the Republic, the 

* Cf. my review of Barker, ‘“‘ Greek Political Theory,” in 
the Philosophical Review, vol. xxix., 1920, p. 86: ‘‘ To say (on 
p. 119) that ‘ by considering the temper of the watchdog 
Plato arrives at the principle,’ ete., is to make no allowance 
for Plato’s literary art and his humour. Plato never reall 
deduces his conclusions from the figurative analogies whi 
he uses to illustrate them.” 

Cf., ¢.9., Rep. 544 p-k, and infra, p. xxvi. 

¢ Cf. the long discussion of Stallbaum in his Introduction 
to the Republic, pp. vii-lxv. For Proclus ef. On Rep. p. 349 
(ed. of Kroll, p. 5 and p. 11). 

4 Cf. 352 p, 367 5, 3694, 427 Dp, 445 4-3, 576c, and 
especially 472 8 with 588 B and 612 B, 



scale and proportion of the various topics introduced, 
the justification and relevance of what may seem to 
some modern readers disproportionate digressions. 
The rigid, undeviating logic which Poe postulates for 
the short story or poem has no application to the 
large-scale masterpieces of literature as we actually 
findthem. And it is the height of naiveté for philo- 
logical critics who have never themselves composed 
any work of literary art to schoolmaster such creations 
by their own a priori canons of the logic and architec- 
tonic unity of composition. Such speculations have 
made wild work of Homeric criticism. They have 
been applied to Demosthenes On the Crown and 
Virgil’s Aeneid. Their employment either in criti- 
cism of the Republic or in support of unverifiable 
hypotheses about the order of composition of its 
different books is sufficiently disposed of by the 
common sense of the passages which I have quoted 
below.* For the reader who intelligently follows the 

® Cf. my review of Diesendruck’s “ Struktur und Cha- 
rakter des Platonischen Phaidros,”’ Class. Phil. vol. xxiii., 
1928, pp. 79 f.: ‘* In the Introduction to the Republic, Jowett 
writes, * Nor need anything be excluded from the plan of a 
great work to which the mind is naturally led by the 
association of ideas and which does not interfere with the 
general purpose.’ Goethe in conversation with Eckermann 
said on May 6, 1827, ‘Da kommen sie und fragen, welche 
Idee ich in meinem Faust zu verkérpern gesucht. Als ob 
ich das selber wiisste und aussprechen kénnte.’ Or with 
more special application to the Phaedrus I may quote 
Bourguet’s review of Raeder, ‘ Cet ensemble, on pensera 
sans doute que M. Raeder a eu tort de le juger mal construit. ~ 
Au lieu d’une imperfection d’assemblage, c'est le plan 
méme que le sujet indiquait. Et peut-étre est-il permis 
d’ajouter qu’on arrive ainsi 4 une autre idée de la com- 
position, plus large et plus profonde, que celle qui est 

d’ordinaire acceptée, trop asservie 4 des canons d’école.” ” 


main argument of the Republic, minor disproportions 
and irrelevancies disappear in the total impression of 
the unity and designed convergence of all its parts in 
a predetermined conclusion. If it pleases Plato to 
dwell a little longer than interests the modern reader 
on the expurgation of Homer (379 p-394), the regula- 
tion of warfare between Greek states (469-471 c), the 
postulates of elementary logic (438-439), the pro- 
gramme of the higher education (521 ff.) and its 
psychological presuppositions (522-524), and the 
justification of the banishment of the poets (595-608 c), 
criticism has only to note and accept the fact. 

Socrates constructs the indispensable minimum 
(369 v-E) of a state or city from the necessities of 
human life, food, shelter, clothing, the inability of the 
isolated individual to provide for these needs and the 
principle of the division of labour. Plato is aware 
that the historic origin of society is to be looked for 
in the family and the clan. But he reserves this 
aspect of the subject for the Laws.” The hypothetical, 
simple primitive state, which Glaucon stigmatizes as 
a city of pigs (372 p), is developed into a normal 
modern society or city by the demand for customary 
luxuries, and by Herbert Spencer’s principle of 
“the multiplication of effects,” one thing leading 
to another (373-374). The luxurious and inflamed 
city (372 ©) is then purged and purified by the 
reform of ordinary Greek education,’ in which the 
expurgation of Homer and Homeric mythology holds 
a place that may weary the modern reader but is not 

@ Cf. 369 s-372 c and my paper on “‘ The Idea of Justice 
in Plato’s Republic,” The Ethical Record, January 1890. 

> 677 ff., 680 a-B ff. 

¢ Cf. my paper, ‘“‘ Some Ideals of Education in Plato's 
Republic,’ The Educational Bi- Monthly, February 1908. 



i rtionate to the importance of the matter for 
Plato’s generation and for the Christian Fathers who 
quote it almost entire. Luxury makes war unavoid- 
able (373 £). The principle of division of labour 
(374 B-£) is applied to the military class, who receive 
a special education, and who, to secure the disin- 
terested use of their power,* are subjected to a 
Spartan discipline and not permitted to touch gold 
or to own property (416-417). 

In such a state the four cardinal virtues, the defini- 
tions of which were vainly sought in the minor dia- 
logues, are easily seen to be realizations on a higher 
plane of the principle of the division of labour.’ It is 
further provisionally assumed that the four cardinal 
virtues constitute and in some sort define goodness.¢ 
The wisdom of such a state resides predominantly 
in the rulers (428); its bravery in the soldiers (429). 
who acquire from their education a fixed and settled 
right opinion as to what things are really to be 
feared. Its sobriety, moderation, and temperance 
(sophrosyne) are the willingness of all classes to . 
accept this division of function (431 £). Its justice | 
is the fulfilment of its own function by every class 
(433). A provisional psychology (435 c-p) discovers 
in the human soul faculties corresponding to the 
three social classes (435 e ff.).4 And the social and 
political definitions of these virtues are then seen to 

* Cf. my article, ‘‘ Plato and His Lessons for To-day,” in 
the Independent, vol. lx., 1906, pp. 253-256. 

» Cf. 433, 443 c and Unity of Plato’s Thought, pp. 15-16. 

© Cf. 427 © with 449 a, and Gorgias, 507 c. 

# There is no real evidence that this is derived from a 
Pythagorean doctrine of the three lives. There is a con- 
siderable recent literature that affirms it. It is enough here 
to refer to Mr. A. E. Taylor's Plato, p. 281, and Burnet, 
Early Greek Philosophy*, p. 296, n. 2. 



fit the individual. Sobriety and temperance are the 
acceptance by every faculty of this higher division of 
labour (441-442). Justice is the performance by every 
faculty of its proper task (433 a-B with 441 p). These 
definitions will stand the test of vulgar instances. 
The man whose own soul is inherently just in this 
ideal sense of the word will also be just in the ordinary 
relations of life. He will not pick and steal and cheat 
and break his promises (442 E-443 a). Justice in 
man and state is health. It is as absurd to maintain 
that the unjust man can be happier than the just as it 
would be to argue that the unhealthy man is happier 
than the healthy (445 a). Our problem is apparently 

It has been argued that this conclusion marks the 
end of a first edition of the Republic to which there are 
vague references in antiquity. There can be no proof 
for such an hypothesis.? Plato’s plan from the first 
presumably contemplated an ideal state governed 
by philosophers (347 p), and there is distinct reference 
in the first four books to the necessity of securing 
the perpetuity of the reformed state by the superior 
intelligence of its rulers.° 

« Cf. my paper on “ The Idea of Good in Plato’s Republic,” 
University of Chicago Studies in Classical Philology, vol. i. 
p. 194: ‘ Utilitarian ethics differs from the evolutionist, 
says Leslie Stephen . . . in that ‘ the one lays down as a 
criterion the happiness, the other the health of the society. 
...’ Mr. Stephen adds, ‘ the two are not really divergent,’ 
and this is the thesis which Plato strains every nerve to 
prove throughout the Republic and Laws.” 

> Cf. infra, p. xxv, note b. 

¢ Of. 4124 with 429, 497c-p, 502p. Cf. also the 
“ longer way,” 435 p with 504 B-c, and further, The Unity 
of Plato’s Thought, note 650, and the article “‘ Plato’s Laws 
and the Unity of Plato’s Thought,” Classical Philology, 
October 1914, 



The transition at the beginning of the fifth book is 
quite in Plato’s manner and recalls the transition in 
the Phaedo (84 c) to a renewal of the discussion of im- 
mortality. Here Glaucon and Adeimantus, as there 
Simmias and Cebes, are conversing in low tones and 
are challenged by Socrates to speak their mind openly 
(449s). They desire a fuller explanation and justifi- 
cation of the paradox, too lightly let fall by Socrates, 
that the guardians will have all things in common, 
including wives and children (449 c, cf. 424 4). Soc- 
rates, after some demur, undertakes to expound this 
topic and in general the pre-conditions of the realiza- 
tion of the ideal state under the continued metaphor 
of three waves of paradox. They are (1) the exercise 
of the same functions by men and women (457 a, 
453 to 457) ; (2) the community of wives (457 c) ; (3) 
(which is the condition of the realization of all these 
ideals) the postulate that either philosophers must 
become kings or kings philosophers. . 

The discussion of these topics and the digressions 
which they suggest give to this transitional book an 
appearance of confusion which attention to the clue 
of the three waves of paradox and the distinction 
between the desirability and the possibility of the 
Utopia contemplated will remove.* The last few 
pages of the book deprecate prevailing prejudice 
against the philosophers and prepare the way for the 
theory and description of the higher education in 
Books VI and VII by distinguishing from the many 
pretenders the true philosophers who are those who 
are lovers of ideas, capable of appreciating them, and 
able to reason in abstractions.» Whatever the meta- 

* Cf. 452 8, 457 c, 457 p-£, 458 a-B, 461 F, 466 Dp, 471 c, 
472 v, 473 cd. > Cf. 474 B, 475 p-£, 477-480, 479 a-p. 




physical implications of this passage ® its practical 
significance for the higher education and the main 
argument of the Republic is that stated here. 

The sixth book continues this topic with an enum- 
eration of the qualities of the perfect student, the 
natural endowments that are the prerequisites of 
the higher education (485 ff.) and the reasons why - 
so few (496 a) of those thus fortunately endowed are 
saved (494 a) for philosophy from the corrupting 
influences of the crowd and the crowd-compelling 

In an ideal state these sports of nature (as Huxley 
styles them) will be systematically selected (499 B ff.), 
tested through all the stages of ordinary education 
and finally conducted by the longer way (504 8 with 
435 p) of the higher education in the abstract sciences 
and mathematics and dialectics to the apprehension of 
the idea of good, which will be their guide in the con- 
duct of the state. This simple thought is expressed in 
a series of symbols—the sun (506 £ ff.), the divided 
line (509 p), the cave (514 ff.)—which has obscured its 
plain meaning for the majority of readers.° For the 
purposes of the Republic and apart from disputable 
metaphysical implications it means simply that ethics 
and politics ought to be something more than mere 
empiricism. Their principles and practice must be 
consistently related to a ~learly conceived final 
standard and ideal of human welfare and good. To 
conceive such a standard and apply it systematically 

@ Cf. The Unity of Plato’s Thought, pp. 55-56. 

> Of. 490 F, 492 ff. 

¢ Cf. my paper on “The Idea of Good,’ The Unity 
of Plato’s Thought, pp. 16 ff. and 74, and my article 

‘Summum Bonum” in Hastings, Encyclopaedia of 
Religion and Ethics. 



to the complications of institutions, law, and educa- 
tion is possible only for first-class minds who have 
undergone a severe discipline in abstract thought, 
supplemented by a long experience in affairs (484 a, 
539). But it is even more impossible that the _ 
multitude should be critics than that they should be 
philosophers (494 a). And so this which is Plato’s | 
plain meaning has been lost in the literature of 
mystic and fanciful interpretation of the imagery 
in which he clothes it. 

From these heights the seventh book descends to 
a sober account of the higher education in the 
mathematical sciences and dialectic (521 c ff.). The 
passage is an interesting document for Plato’s con- 
ception of education and perhaps for the practice in 
his Academy. It also is the chief text for the con- 
troverted qiestion of Plato’s attitude towards science 
and the place of Platonism in the history of science, 
but it need not further detain us here.* This book, 
in a sense, completes the description of the ideal 

The eighth book, one of the most brilliant pieces 
of writing in Plato, is a rapid survey of the diver- 
gence, the progressive degeneracy from the ideal 
state in the four types to which Plato thinks the 
tiresome infinity of the forms of government that 
minute research enumerates among Greeks and 
barbarians may be conveniently reduced (544 c-p). 
These are the timocracy, whose principle is honour 
(545 c ff.), the oligarchy, which regards wealth 
(550 c ff., 551), the democracy, whose slogan is 

* Cf. my paper, “ Platonism and the History of Science,” 
American Philosophical Society's Proceedings, vol. Ixvi., 
1927, pp. 171 ff. 



liberty, or “ doing as one likes ”’ (557 B-z), the tyranny, 
enslaved to appetite. In this review history, satire, 
political philosophy, and the special literary motives 
of the Republic are blended in a mixture hopelessly 
disconcerting to all literal-minded critics from 
Aristotle down. 

In the first two types Plato is evidently thi 
of the better (544 c) and the worse aspects (548 a). 
Sparta. In his portrayal of the democratic state he 
lets himself go in satire of fourth-century Athens 
(557 B ff.), intoxicated with too heady draughts of 
liberty (562 p) and dying of the triumph of the liberal 
party. His picture of the tyrant is in part a powerful 
restatement of Greek commonplace (565 a-576) and 
in part a preparation for the return to the main 
argument of the Republic (577 ff.) by direct applica- 
tion of the analogy between the individual and the 
state with which he began. 

In the ninth book all the lines converge on the 
original problem. After adding the final touches to 
the picture of the terrors and inner discords (576-580) 
of the tyrant’s soul, Plato finally decides the issue 
between the just and the unjust life by three argu- 
ments. The just life is proved the happier (1) by the 
analogy with the contrasted happiness of the royal 
(ideal) and the unhappiness of the tyrannized state 
(577 c ff.), (2) by reason of an argument which Plato 
never repeats but which John Stuart Mill seriously 
accepts (582-583): The man who lives mainly for 
the higher spiritual satisfactions has necessarily had 
experience of the pleasures of sense and ambition 
also. He only can compare and judge. The 
devotees of sense and ambition know little or nothing 
of the higher happiness of the intellect and the soul. 



(3) The third and perhaps the most weighty proof is 
the principle on which the Platonic philosophy or 
science of ethics rests, the fact that the pleasures of 
sense are essentially negative, not to say worthless, 
because they are preconditioned by equivalent wants 
which are pains.* This principle is clearly suggested 
in the Gorgias, Meno, Phaedrus, and Phaedo, and is 
elaborately explained in the psychology of the 
Philebus. It is in fact the basis of the Platonic ethics, 
which the majority of critics persist in deducing from 
their notion of Plato’s metaphysics. These three 
arguments, however, are not the last word. For final 
conviction Plato falls back on the old analogy of 
health and disease, with which the fourth book 
provisionally concluded the argument, and which as 
we there saw is all that the scientific ethics of Leslie 
Stephen can urge in the last resort.’ The immoral 
soul is diseased and cannot enjoy true happiness. 
This thought is expressed in the image of the 
many-headed beast (588c ff.) and confirmed in 
a final passage of moral eloquence which forms a 
climax and the apparent conclusion of the whole 

The tenth book may be regarded either as an 
appendix and after-piece or as the second and higher 
climax prepared by an intervening level tract separat- 
ing it from the eloquent conclusion of the ninth book. 
The discussion in the first half of the book of the 
deeper psychological justification of the banishment 
of imitative poets is interesting in itself. It is 
something that Plato had to say and that could be 

* Cf. 583 8 ff. and Unity of Plato’s Thought, pp. 23 f. and 
26 f., and “* The ldea of Good in Plato’s Republic,” pp. 192 ff. 
* Cf. supra, p. xvi, note a. 



said here with the least interruption of the general 
design. But its chief service is that it rests the 
emotions between two culminating points and so 
allows each its full force. Whether by accident or 
design, this method of composition is found in the 
Iliad, where the games of the twenty-third book 
relieve the emotional tension of the death of Hector 
in the twenty-second and prepare us for the final 
climax of the ransom of his body and his burial in 
the twenty-fourth. It is also found in the oration 
On the Crown, which has two almost equally eloquent 
perorations separated by a tame level tract. In 
Plato’s case there is no improbability in the assump- 
tion of conscious design. The intrinsic preferability 
of justice has been proved and eloquently summed 
up. The impression of that moral eloquence would 
have been weakened if Plato had immediately pro- 
ceeded to the myth that sets forth the rewards that 
await the just man in the life to come. And the 
myth itself is much more effective after an interval 
of sober argument and discussion. Then that natural 
human desire for variation and relief of monotony 
for which the modulations of Plato’s art everywhere 
provide makes us welcome the tale of Er the son 
of Arminius (614.8), the “angel” from over there 
(614). And we listen entranced to the myth that 
was saved and will save us if we believe it—believe 
that the soul is immortal, capable of infinite issues 
of good and evil, of weal or woe. So shall we hold 
ever to the upward way and follow righteousness 
and sobriety with clear-eyed reason that we may be 
dear to ourselves and to God, both in the time of 
our sojourn and trial here below and also when, like 
victors in the games, we receive the final crown and 


iy ey ag ¥ “v 


ale that thus both here and in all the millennial 
’s progress of the soul of which we fable we 
shail fare well (621 c-p). 

This summary presents only the bare frame- 
work of the ideas of the Republic. But we may 
fittingly add here a partial list of the many brilliant 
passages of description, character - painting, satire, | 
imagery, and moral eloquence dispersed through the — 

They include the dramatic introduction (327-331) 
with the picture of the old age of the just man, 
prefiguring the conclusion of the whole work; the 
angry intervention of Thrasymachus (336 8 ff.); the 
altercation between Thrasymachus and Cleitophon 
(340); Thrasymachus perspiring under Socrates’ 
questions because it was a hot day (350p); the 
magnificent restatement of the case for injustice by 
Glaucon and Adeimantus (357-367); the Words- 
worthian idea of the influence of a beautiful environ- 
ment on the young soul (401) ; the satiric description 
of the valetudinarian and malade imaginatre (406- 
407); the eloquent forecast of the fate of a society 
in which the guardians exploit their charges and the 
watchdogs become grey wolves (416-417) ; the satire 
on the lazy workman’s or socialist paradise (420 D-£) ; 
the completion of the dream and the first of three 
noble statements of what Emerson calls the sove- 
reignty of ethics, the moral ideal, the anticipated 
Stoic principle that nothing really matters but the 
good will (443-444; cf. 591 £, 618 c); the soul that 
contemplates all time and all existence (486 a); the 
allegory of the disorderly ship and the riotous crew 
(488-489); the power of popular assemblies to 

VOL. I c Xxili 


corrupt the youthful soul and all souls that have not 
a footing somewhere in eternity (492); the great 
beast that symbolizes the public (493 a-s)—not to 
be confused, as often happens, with the composite 
beast that is an allegory of the mixed nature of man ; 
the little bald tinker who marries his master’s 
daughter, an allegory of the unworthy wooers of 
divine philosophy (4958); the true philosophers 
whose contemplation of the heavens and of eternal 
things leaves them no leisure for petty bickerings 
and jealousies (500 c-p); the sun as symbol of the 
idea of good (507-509) ; the divided line illustrating 
the faculties of mind and the distinction between 
the sciences and pure philosophy or dialectics (510- 
511); the prisoners in the fire-lit cave, an allego 

of the unphilosophic, unreleased mind (514-518) ; 
the entire eighth book, which Macaulay so greatly 
admired; and especially its satire on democracy 
doing as it likes, the inspiration of Matthew Arnold 
(562-563) ; Plato’s evening prayer, as it has been 
called, anticipating all that is true and significant 
in the Freudian psychology (571); the description of 
the tortured tyrant’s soul, applied by Tacitus to the 
Roman emperors (578-579); the comparison of the 
shadows we are and the shadows we pursue with 

the Greeks and Trojans who fought for a phantom. 

Helen (586 B-c); the likening of the human soul to 
a many-headed beast (588 c); the city of which the 
pattern is laid up in heaven (592 a-s) ;_ the spell of 
Homer (607 c-p) ; the crowning myth of immortality 
. The Republic is the central and most comprehensive 
work of Plato’s maturity. It may have been com- 



posed between the years 380 and 370 b.c. in the fifth 
or sixth decade of Plato’s life.* 

The tradition that the earlier books were published 
earlier can neither be proved nor disproved.” 

The invention of printing has given to the idea of 
“ publication ” a precision of meaning which it could 
not bear in the Athens of the fourth century B.c. 
Long before its formal completion the plan and the 
main ideas of Plato’s masterpiece were doubtless 
familiar, not only to the students of the Academy 
but to the rival school of Isocrates and the literary 
gossips of Athens. 

Unlike the presumably earlier Charmides, Laches, 
Lysis, Euthyphro, Meno, Protagoras, Gorgias, Euthy- 
demus, the Republic is a positive, not to say a dog- 
matic, exposition of Plato’s thought, and not, except 
in the introductory first book, an idealizing dra- 

* Cf. Unity of Plato’s Thought, p. 78, n. 606; Zeller, 
Plato*, p. 551, discusses the evidence and anticipates 
without accepting Taylor’s argument (Plato, p. 20) that 
the quotation of the sentence about philosophers being kings 
(Rep. 473 c-p, 499 B-c) by the author of the seventh Lpistle 
proves that the Republic was already written in the year 388/7. 

> Cf. Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae, xiv. 3. 3 and other 
passages cited by Henri Alline, Histoire du texte de Platon, 

. 14, and Hirmer, “ Entstehung und Komp. d. Plat. Rep.,” 
Jahrbiicher fiir Phil., Suppl., N.F., vol. xxiii. p. 654; 
Wilamowitz, i. pp. 209 ff. on the ‘‘ Thrasymachus ’’; Hans 
Raeder, Platons philosophische Entwicklung, pp. 187 ff. ; 
Ueberweg-Praechter (Altertum), p. 217. Cf. Ivo. Bruns, 
Das literarische Portrait der Griechen, etc., p. 322: ‘* Vor 
allem aber bestimmt mich der Gesammtscharakter des 
ersten Buches, welches zu keinem anderen Zwecke ge- 
schrieben sein kann, als demjenigen, den es in dem jetzigen 
Zusammenhange erfiillt, namlich, als Einleitung in ein 
grésseres Ganzes zu dienen. Es kann nie dazu bestimmt 
gewesen sein, eine Sonderexistenz zu fiihren, wie etwa der 




matization of Socrates’ talks with Athenian youths 
and sophists. 

Aristotle cites the Republic as the Poltteia,* and 
this was the name given to it by Plato. In 527c 
it is playfully called the Kallipoks, The secondary 
title 7) wept duxaiov is not found in the best manu- 
scripts, and, as the peculiar use of 7 indicates, was 
probably added later. 

But, as already said, we cannot infer from this that 
the ethical interest is subordinated to the political.’ 
The two are inseparable. The distinction between 
ethics and politics tends to vanish in early as in recent 
philosophy. Even Aristotle, who first perhaps wrote 
separate treatises on ethics and politics, combines 
them as » zepi Ta avOpdrwa dirocopia. He speaks 
of ethics as a kind of politics. And though he regards 
the family and the individual as historically preceding 
the state, in the order of nature and the idea the state 
is prior. The modern sociologist who insists that the 
psychological and moral life of the individual apart from 
the social organism is an unreal abstraction is merely 
returning to the standpoint of the Greek who could 
not conceive man as a moral being outside of the polis.° 
In the consciously figurative language of Plato,* the 
idea of justice is reflected both in the individual and 
the state, the latter merely exhibits it on a larger 
scale. Or, to put it more simply, the true and only 
aim of the political art is to make the citizens happier 
by making them better. And though good men 

@ Politics, 1264 b 24. The plural also occurs, ibid. 
1293 b 1. 

> Of. supra, p. xii, note ¢. © Cf. supra, p. xii. 

4 368 p-369 a. It is uncritical to press the metaphysical 
suggestions of this passage. 

¢ Euthydemus 291 c ff., Gorgias 521 p, Euthyphro 2 v. 



arise sporadically,* and are preserved by the grace of 
God in corrupt states,’ the only hope for mankindisin 
a state governed by philosophical wisdom (473 p), and 
the ideal man can attain to his full stature and live a 
complete life only in the ideal city.¢ 

The larger part of the Republic is in fact occupied 
with the ideal state, with problems of education and 
social control, but, as already said, we are repeatedly 
reminded (supra, p. xii) that all these discussions are 
in Plato’s intention subordinated to the main ethical ,, 
proof that the just life is happier than the unjust. a 
Ethies takes precedence in that the final appeal is to 
the individual will and the individual thirst for happi- 
ness. Plato is to that extent an individualist and a 
utilitarian. Politics is primary in so far as man’s 
moral life cannot exist outside of the state. 

There are hints of the notion of an ideal state before 
Plato.¢ And the literary motif of Utopia has a long 
history.* But it was the success of the Republic and 
Laws that made the portrayal of the best state the 
chief problem, not to say the sole theme, of Greek 
political science. In Plato this was due to an idealistic 
temper and a conviction of the irremediable corrup- 
tion of Greek social and political life. The place 

* Rep. 520 8, Protag. 320 a, Meno 92 v-z, Laws 642 c, 
951 B. 

> Meno 99 ©, Rep. 493 a. 

© Cf. Rep. 497 a; Spencer, Ethics, vol. i. p. 280. 

¢ Cf. Newman, Politics of Aristotle, vol. i. pp. 85 ff. 

* Of the immense literature of the subject it is enough to 
refer to Alfred Dorens’ “* Wiinschraume und Wiinschzeiten ” 
in Vortrage der Bibliothek Warburg, 1924-1925, Berlin, 1927 : 
Fr. Kleinwachter, Die Staats Romane, Vienna, 1891; Edgar 
Salin, Platon und die griechische Utopie, Leipzig, 1921. An 
incomplete list collected from these essays includes more 
than fifty examples. 




assigned to the ideal state in Aristotle’s Politics is 
sometimes deplored by the admirers of the matter- 
of-fact and inductive methods of the first and fifth 
books. And in our own day the value of this motif 
for the serious science of society is still debated by 

The eternal fascination of the literary motif is in- 
disputable, and we may enjoy without cavil the form 
which the artist Plato preferred for the exposition of 
his thought, while careful to distinguish the thoughts 
themselves from their sometimes fantastic embodi- 
ment. But we must first note one or two of the funda- 
mental differences between the presuppositions of 
Plato’s speculations and our own. (1) Plato’s state is 
a Greek city,not a Persian empire, a European nation, 
or a conglomerate America. To Greek feeling com- 
plete and rational life was impossible for the in- 
habitant of a village or the subject of a satrap. It 
was attainable only through the varied social and 
political activities of the Greek pols, equipped with 
agora, gymnasium, assembly, theatre, and temple- 
crowned acropolis. It resulted from the action and 
interaction upon themselves and the world of in- 
telligent and equal freemen conscious of kinship and 
not too numerous for self-knowledge or too few for 
self-defence. From this point of view Babylon, 
Alexandria, Rome, London, and New York would not 
be cities but chaotic aggregations of men. And in the 
absence of steam, telegraphy, and representative 
government the empires of Darius, Alexander, and 
Augustus would not be states but loose associations 
of cities, tribes, and provinces. Much of Plato’s 
sociology is therefore inapplicable to modern con- 
ditions. But though we recognize, we must not 



exaggerate the difference. The Stoic and Christian 
city of God, the world citizenship into which the 
subjects of Rome were progressively adopted, the 
mediaeval papacy and empire, the twentieth-century 
democratic nation are the expressions of larger and 
perhaps more generous ideals. But in respect of the 
achievement of a complete life for all their members, 
they still remain failures or experiments. The city- 
state, on the other hand, has once and again at Athens 
and Florence so nearly solved its lesser problem as to 
make the ideal city appear not altogether a dream. 
And, accordingly, modern idealists are returning to 
the conception of smaller cantonal communities, inter- 
connected, it is true, by all the agencies of modern 
science and industrialism, but in their social tissue and 
structure not altogether incomparable to the small 
city-state which Plato contemplated as the only 
practical vehicle of the higher life. 

(2) The developments of science and industry have 
made the idea of progress an essential part of every 
modern Utopia. The subjugation of nature by man 
predicted in Bacon’s New Atlantis has come more and 
more to dominate all modern dreams of social reform. 
It is this which is to lay the spectre of Malthusianism. 
It is this which is to give us the four-hour day and will 
furnish the workman’s dwelling with all the labour- 
saving conveniences of electricity, supply his table 
with all the delicacies of all the seasons, entertain his 
cultivated leisure with automatic reproductions of all 
the arts, and place flying machines and automobiles 
at his disposal when he would take the air. 

This is not the place to estimate the part of illusion 
in these fancies. It is enough to observe that in 
dwelling too complacently upon them modern utop- 



ians are apt to forget the moral and spiritual pre- 
conditions of any fundamental betterment of human 
life. Whereas Plato, conceiving the external con- 
dition of man’s existence to be essentially fixed, has 
more to tell us of the discipline of character and the 
elevation of intelligence. In Xavier Demaistre’s 
Voyage autour de ma chambre, Plato, revisiting the 
glimpses of the moon, is made to say, “ In spite of 
ot: glorious gains in physical science, my opinion of 

uman nature is unchanged—but I presume that your 
progress in psychology, history, and the scientific 
control of human nature, has by this time made 
possible that ideal Republic which in the conditions of 
my own age I regarded as an impracticable dream.” 
Demaistre was sorely embarrassed for a reply. Have 
we one ready ? 

Living in a milder climate and before the birth of 
the modern industrial proletariat, Plato is less haunted 
than we by the problem of pauperism.* And his 
austerity of temper would have left him indifferent, 
if not hostile, to the ideal of universal luxury and ease. 
It was not the life he appointed for his guardians, and 
the demand of the workers for it he has satirized in 
advance (420 p-£). If we add to the two points here 
considered some shades of ethical and religious feel- 
ing, associated with Christianity, we shall have nearly 
exhausted the list of fundamental differences between 
Plato’s political and social thought and our own. 
The Republic, if we look beneath the vesture of 
paradox to the body of its substantive thought, might 

@ Cf., however, Péhlmann, Geschichte der sozialen Frage 
und des Sozialismus in der antiken Welt, who, however, in 
the opinion of some of his critics, exaggerates the industrialism 
and industrial problems of Athens. 



seem a book of yesterday or to-morrow. The concep- 
tion of society ~ organism, with the dependence 
of laws and institutions upon national temperament. 
and customs, the omnipotence of public opinion, the 
division of labour and the reasons for it, the necessity 
of specialization, the formation of a trained standing 
army, the limitation of the right of private property, 
the industrial and political equality of women, the 
reform of the letter of the creeds in order to save the 
spirit, the proscription of unwholesome art and litera- 
ture, the reorganization of education, eugenics, the 
kindergarten method, the distinction between higher 
and secondary education, the endowment of research, 
the application of the higher mathematics to astron- 
omy and physics—all this and much more may be read 
in it by him who runs. é 
A critical interpretation would first remove some 
obstacles to a true appreciation interposed by cap- 
tious cavils or over-ingenious scholarship, and then 
proceed to study Plato’s ideas (1) as embedded in the 
istic structure of the Republic, (2) as the outgrowth 
of Plato's ‘thought and experience as a I of 
the suggestions that came to him from his predeces- 
sors and contemporaries. The Republic is,in Huxley’s 
words, a “ noble, philosophical romance ”—it is a dis- 
eussion of ethics, politics, sociology, religion and edu- 
cation cast in the form of a Utopia or an Emile. The 
criticism of Plato’s serious meanings is one thing. The 
observation of the way in which they are coloured and 
heightened by the exigencies of this special literary 
form is another. Plato himself has told us that the 
Republic is a fairy-tale or fable about justice. And he 
has warned us that every such finished composition 
must contain a large measure of what in contrast to 



the severity of pure dialectic he calls jest or play.* 
Within the work itself the artistic illusion had to be 
preserved. But even there Plato makes it plain that 
his chief purpose is to embody certain ideas in an 
ideal, not to formulate a working constitution or body 
of legislation for an actual state. An ideal retains its 
value even though it may never be precisely realized 
in experience. It is a pattern laid up in heaven for 
those who can see and understand. Plato will not 
even assert that the education which he prescribes is 
the best. He is certain only that the best education, 
whatever it may be, is a pre-condition of the ideal 
state (416 B-c). Somewhere in the infinite past or 
future—it may be in the barbarian world beyond our 
ken—the true city may be visioned whenever and 
wherever political power and philosophic wisdom are 
wedded and not as now divorced. He affirms no more. 

It is a waste of ink to refute the paradoxes or harp 
upon the omissions of the Republic in disregard of 
these considerations. The paradoxes are softened 
and explained, the omissions supplied in the Politicus 
and the Laws, which express fundamentally identical 
ethical and political convictions from a slightly 
different point of view and a perhaps somewhat 
sobered mood.’ To assume that differences which are 
easily explained by the moulding of the ideas in their 
literary framework are caused by revolutions in 
Plato’s beliefs is to violate all canons of sound criti- 
cism and all the established presumptions of the 
unity of Plato’s thought. 

The right way to read the Republic is fairly indicated 

* Phaedr. 278 &. 
> Cf. my paper, ‘‘ Plato’s Laws and the Unity of Plato’s 
Thought,” Class. Phil. vol. ix., 1914, pp. 345-369. 



by casual utterances of such critics as Renan, Pater, 
Emerson, and Emile Faguet. The captious attitude 
of mind is illustrated by the set criticism of Aristotle, 
the Christian Fathers, Zeller, De Quincey, Landor, 
Spencer, and too large a proportion of professional 
philologists and commentators. ‘‘ As the poet too,” 
says Emerson, “ he (Plato) is only contemplative. He 
did not, like Pythagoras, break himself with an insti- 
tution. All his painting in the Republic must be 
esteemed mythical with the intent to bring out, 
sometimes in violent colours, his thought.” 

This disposes at once of all criticism, hostile or 
friendly, aesthetic or philological, that scrutinizes the 

lic as if it were a bill at its second reading in 
Parliament, or a draft of a constitution presented to 
an American state convention. The greater the in- 
genuity and industry applied to such interpretations 
the further we are led astray. Even in the Laws 
Plato warns us that we are not yet, but are only 
becoming, legislators. 

In the Republic it suits Plato’s design to build up the 
state from individual units and their economic needs. 
But his critics, from Aristotle to Sir Henry Maine, 
derive their conception of the patriarchal theory of 
society from his exposition of it in the Lams. 

He embodies his criticism of existing Greek institu- 
tions in a scheme for the training of his soldiers, supple- 
mented by the higher education of the guardians. 
But we cannot infer, as hasty critics have done, from 
421 a that he would not educate the masses at all. 
The banishment of Homer is a vivid expression of 
Plato’s demand that theology be purified and art 
moralized. But Milton wisely declined to treat it as 
a serious argument against the liberty of unlicensed 



printing in England. And nothing can be more pre- 
posterous than the statement still current in books of 
supposed authority that the severity of dialectics had 
suppressed in Plato the capacity for emotion and the 
appreciation of beauty. The abolition of private 
property among the ruling classes is partly the ex- 
pression of a religious, a Pythagorean, not to say a 
Christian, ideal, which Plato reluctantly renounces in 
the Laws.* But it is mainly a desperate attempt to 
square the circle of politics and justify the rule of the 
intelligent few by an enforced disinterestedness and 
the annihilation of all possible “ sinister interests.” ? 
All criticism that ignores this vital point is worthless.° 

The same may be said of the community of wives, 
which is further, as Schopenhauer remarks, merely a 
drastic expression of the thought that the breeding of 
men ought to be as carefully managed as that of 
animals. It is abandoned in the Laws. The detailed 
refutations of Aristotle are beside the mark, and the 
denunciations of the Christian Fathers and De 
Quincey and Landor are sufficiently met by Lucian’s 
remark that those who find in the Republic an apology 
for licentiousness little apprehend in what sense the 
divine philosopher meant his doctrine of communistie 

It is the height of naiveté to demonstrate by the 
statistics of a Parisian créche that the children of the 
guardians would die in infancy, or to inquire too 
curiously into the risks they would run in accompany- 
ing their parents on horseback to war (466 Fr, 467 F). 

® Rep. 416, 462-463, 465 8, Timaeus 18 8, Laws 739 B-p. 

> Cf. supra, p. xv and infra, p. xlii. 

¢ Even Newman, for example, seems to accept the Aristo- 

telian objection that such a military caste will tyrannize, 
See Newman’s Politics of Aristotle, vol. i. pp. 326 f. 



The comparison of the individual to the state is a 
suggestive analogy for sociology and at the same 
time a literary motif that is worth precisely what the 
writer’s tact and skill can make of it. Plato’s use of 
the idea is most effective. By subtle artifices of style 
the cumulative effect of which can be felt only in the 
original, the reader is brought to conceive of the social 
organism as one monster man or leviathan, whose 
sensuous appetites are the unruly mechanic mob, 
whose disciplined emotions are the trained force that 
checks rebellion within and guards against invasion 
from without, and whose reason is the philosophic 
statesmanship that directs each and all for the good 
of the whole, And conversely the individual man is 
pictured as a biological colony of passions and appetites 
which “‘ swarm like worms within our living clay "—a 
curious compound of beast and man which can attain 
real unity and personality only by the conscious 
domination of the monarchical reason. The origina- 
tion of this idea apparently belongs to Plato. But he 
can hardly be held responsible for the abuse of it by 
modern sociologists, or for Herbert Spencer’s pon- 
derous demonstration that with the aid of Huxley 
and Carpenter he can discover analogies between the 
body politic and the physiological body in comparison 
with which those of Plato are mere child’s-play. 

It is unnecessary to multiply illustrations of such 
matter-of-fact and misconceived criticism. Enough 
has been said perhaps to prepare the way for the 
broad literary common-sense appreciation of the 
Republic, which an intelligent reader, even of a trans- 
lation, will arrive at for himself if he reads without 
prejudice and without checking at every little 
apparent oddity in the reasoning or the expression. 




The proper historical background for such a broad _ 
understanding of Plato’s political and social philosophy 
is Thucydides’ account of the thirty years’ Pelo- 
ponnesian war, which Hobbes translated in order to 
exhibit to England and Europe the evils of un- 
bridled democracy. Thucydides’ history is the 
ultimate source of all the hard-headed cynical politi- 
cal philosophy of Realpolitik and the Superman, from 
Machiavelli, Guicciardini, and Hobbes to Nietzsche 
and Bernardi. And in recent years the speeches 
which he attributes to the Athenian ambassadors 
proposing to violate the neutrality of Melos have 
been repeatedly rediscovered and quoted. They are 
merely the most drastic expression of a philosophy 
of life and polities which pervades the entire history 
and which I studied many years ago in a paper on 
the “Implicit Ethics and Psychology of Thucy- 
dides,”’ * some of the ideas of which are reproduced 
apparently by accident in Mr. Cornford’s T'hucydides 
Mythistoricus. The moral disintegration of a pro- 
longed world war is the predestined medium for the 
culture of this poisonous germ. And the Pelo- 
ponnesian war was a world war for the smaller 
international system of the Greek states. It was 
for Greece that suicide which our civil war may 
prove to have been for the old American New 
England and Virginia, and which we pray the World 
War may not prove to have been for Europe. The 
analogy, which we need not verify in detail, is 
startling, though the scale in Greece was infinitely 
smaller. In both cases we see an inner ring or focus 
of intense higher civilization encompassed by a vast 

* Transactions of Amer. Philol. Assoc, vol. xxiv. pp. 66 ff. 
The Dial, Chicago, 1907, xliii. p. 202. 

a a 

en eae ea 


outer semi-civilized or barbarian world of coloniza- 
tion, places in the sun, trade monopolies, and spheres 
of influence. In both the inner ring is subdivided 
into jealous states whose unstable equilibrium 
depends on the maintenance of the balance of power 
between two great systems, one commercial, demo- 
cratic, and naval, the other authoritative, dis- 
ciplined, military. The speeches of Pericles and 
King Archidamus in Thucydides analyse, contrast, 
and develop the conflicting ideals and weigh sea 
power against land power, as the speeches of rival 
prime ministers have done in our day. I merely 
suggest the parallel. What concerns us here is that 
to understand Plato we must compare, I do not say 
identify, him with Renan writing about la réforme 
intellectuelle et morale of France after the année 
terrible, or, absit omen, an English philosopher of 
1950 speculating on the decline and fall of the 
British Empire, or an American philosopher of 1980 
meditating on the failure of American democracy. 
The background of the comparatively optimistic 
Socrates was the triumphant progressive imperialistic 
democracy of the age of Pericles, and the choric 
odes of the poets and prophets of the imaginative 
reason, Aeschylus and Sophocles. The background 
of Plato, the experience that ground to devilish 
colours all his dreams and permanently darkened his 
vision of life, was the world war that made shipwreck 
of the Periclean ideal and lowered the level of 
Hellenic civilization in preparation for its final 
overthrow. The philosophy which he strove to 
overcome in himself and others was the philosophy 
of the political speeches in Thucydides and of those 
bitter disillusionized later plays of Euripides. His 



middle age fell and his Republic was conceived in an 
Athens stagnating under the hateful oppression of 
the Spartan Junker dominating Greece in alliance 
with the unspeakable Persian. The environment 
of his old age and its masterpiece, the Laws, was 
the soft, relaxed, sensuous, cynical, pococurante, 
jin de siécle Athens of the New Comedy, 
helplessly to the catastrophe of Chaeronea—the 
Athens which Isocrates expected to save by treaties 
of peace with all mankind and shutting up the wine- 
shops, and which Demosthenes vainly admonished 
to build up its fleet and drill its armies against the 
Macedonian peril. When Plato is characterized as 
an unpatriotic, undemocratic, conservative reaction- 
ary, false to the splendid Periclean tradition, we must 
remember that Pericles’ funeral oration had become 
for all but the fourth of July orators of Plato's 
generation as intolerable and ironic a mockery as 
Lowell's Commemoration Ode and Lincoln’s Gettysburg 
address will seem to America if democracy fails to 
unify us into a real people. His philosophy was 
“reactionary ’’ in the sense that it was his own 
inevitable psychological and moral reaction against 
the sophistical ethics? of the Superman on one 
side and on the other against the cult of inefficiency 
and indiscipline which he had come to regard 
as wholly inseparable from unlimited democ 
This reactionary aspect of Plato’s political and social 
philosophy has been vividly depicted, though perhaps 
with some strained allusions to the democracy of 
contemporary France, in Faguet’s five chapters on 
the hatreds of Plato. 

« Cf. my paper on the “ Interpretation of the Timaeus,” 
A.J.P. vol. ix. pp. 395 ff. 



The equivocal labels radical and conservative mean 
little in their application to minds of the calibre of 
a Plato or even of a Burke. What really matters is 
the kind of conservative, the kind of radical that 
you are. As Mill says, there is a distinction ignored 
in all political classification, and more important than 
any political classification, the difference between 
superior and inferior minds. 

As a thinker for all time, Plato in logical grasp 
and coherency of consecutive and subtle thought, 
stands apart from and above a Renan, a Burke, an 
Arnold, or a Ruskin. But as a man, his mood, in- 
evitably determined by his historical environment, 
was that of Matthew Arnold in the ’sixties, en- 
deavouring to prick with satire the hide of the 
British Philistine, or of Ruskin in the ’seventies 
embittered by the horrors of the Franco-Prussian 
War and seeking consolation in the political economy 
of the future. We may denominate him a conserva- 
tive and a reactionary. in view of this personal mood 
and temper, and his despair of the democracy of 
fin de siécle Athens. But his Utopian Republic 
advocated not only higher education and votes, but 
offices for women, and a eugenic legislation that 
would stagger Oklahoma. And so if you turn to 
Professor Murray’s delightful Euripides and his Age, 
you will read that Euripides is the child of a strong 
and splendid tradition and is, together with Plato, 
the first of all rebels against it. Suppose Professor 
Murray had written, Bernard Shaw is the child of 
a strong and splendid tradition and, together with 
Matthew Arnold, the first of all rebels against it. 
I think we should demur, and feel that something 
was wrong. We should decline to bracket Arnold 

VOL, I d XXXix 


and Shaw as rebels to English tradition, despite the 
fact that both endeavoured to stir up the British 
Philistine with satire and wit. As a matter of fact, 
Plato detested Euripides and all his works, and 
generally alludes to him with Aristophanic irony. _ 

If we pass by the terrible arraignment in the 
Gorgias of the democracy that was guilty of the 
judicial murder of Socrates, the political philosophy 
of the minor dialogues is mainly a Socratic canvassing 
of definitions, and an apparently vain but illuminating 
quest for the supreme art of life, the art that will make 
us happy, the political or royal art, which guides and 
controls all else, including music, literature, and edu- 
cation. This conception is represented in the Republic 
by the poetic allegory of the Idea of Good and the 
description of the higher education of the true states- 
man which alone lends it real content. The matter is 
quite simple, and has been confused only by the 
refusal to accept Plato’s own plain statements about 
it and the persistent tendency to translate Plato’s 
good poetry into bad metaphysics.* 

The metaphysics of the Idea of Good will be treated 
in the introduction to the second volume. Here it is 
enough to quote Mr. Chesterton, who, whether by 
accident or design, in a lively passage of his Heretics, 
expresses the essential meaning of the doctrine in the 
political, ethical, and educational philosophy of the 
Republic quite sufficiently for practical purposes. 

‘“ Every one of the popular modern phrases and 
ideals is a dodge in order to shirk the problem of 
what is good. We are fond of talking about ‘ liberty ’; 
that, as we talk of it, is a dodge to avoid discussing : 

* Cf. my article ‘‘ Summum Bonum ” in Hastings’ Encyclo- 
pedia of Religion and Ethics. 



what is good. We are fond of talking about ‘ pro- 
gress’; that is a dodge to avoid discussing what is 

. We are fond of talking about ‘ education’ ; 
that is a dodge to avoid discussing what is good. The 
modern man says, ‘ Let us leave all these arbitrary 
standards and embrace liberty.’ That is, logically 
rendered, ‘ Let us not decide what is good, but let 
it be considered good not to decide it.’ He says, 
“Away with your old moral formulae; I am for 
aes a This, logically stated, means, ‘ Let us not 
settle what is good ; but let us settle whether we are 
getting more of it.’ He says, ‘ Neither in religion nor 
morality, my friend, lie the hopes of the race, but in 
education.’ This, clearly expressed, means, ‘ We 
cannot decide what is good, but let us give it to our 

children.’”” So far Mr. Chesterton. 

'  Plato’s Idea of Good, then, means that the educa- 
tion of his philosophic statesmen must lift them to 
a région of thought which transcends the intellectual 

confusion in which these dodges and evasions alike | 

of the ward boss and the gushing settlement-worker 
dwell. He does not tell us in a quotable formula 
what the good is, because it remains an inexhaust- 
ible ideal. But he portrays with entire lucidity his 

own imaginative conception of Greek social good | 

in his Republic and Laws. 

The doctrine of the Idea of Good is simply the | 

postulate that social well-being must be organized not ~ 

by rule-of-thumb, hand-to-mouth opportunist politi- 
cians, but by highly trained statesmen systematically 
keeping in view large and consciously apprehended 
ends. The only way to compass this, Plato affirms, is 
first to prepare and test your rulers by the severest 
education physical and mental, theoretical and 



practical that the world has yet seen, and secondly 
to insure their freedom from what Bentham calls 
“sinister interests ” by taking away from them 
their safe-deposit vaults and their investments in 
corporation stock and requiring them to live on a 
moderate salary and a reasonable pension. 

This, or so much of it as may be translated into 
modern terms, is the essence of Plato’s social and 
political philosophy. 

But Plato’s Republic, whatever its contributions to 
political theory or its suggestiveness to the practical 
politician or social reformer, is not a treatise on 
political science or a text-book of civics. It is the 
City of God in which Plato’s soul sought refuge from 
the abasement of Athenian politics which he felt 
himself impotent to reform. The philosopher, he 
says (496 p) with unmistakable reference to Socrates 
(Apology 31 ©) and apology for himself, knows that no 
politician is honest nor is there any champion of justice 
at whose side he may fight and be saved. He resem- 
bles a man fallen among wild beasts. He is unwilling 
to share and impotent singly to oppose their rapine. 
He is like one who in a driving storm of dust and sleet 
stands aside under shelter of a wall and seeing others 
filled full with all iniquity, must be content to live 
his own life, keep his soul unspotted from the world, 
and depart at last with peace and good willand gracious 
hopes. This is something. But how much more could 
he accomplish for himself and others, Plato wistfully 
adds, in a society in harmony with his true nature. 
And so he plays (it is his own word) with the construc- 
tion of such a state. But when the dream is finished, 
his epilogue is: We have built a city in words, since 
it exists nowhere on earth, though there may be a 


a a Do's 


pattern of it laid up in heaven. But whether it exists 
or not, the true philosopher will concern himself with 
the politics of this city only, of this city only will he 
constitute himself a citizen. As Emerson puts it, he 
was born to other politics. The witty and cynical 
Lucian mocks at this city in the clouds where Socrates 
lives all alone by himself, governed by his own laws. 
And I have no time to answer him now, even by enum- 
eration of the great spirits who have taken refuge 
in the Platonic City of God. It was there that St. 
Augustine found consolation and hope in the crash 
and downfall of the Roman Empire. And fifteen 
hundred years later an unwonted glow suffuses the 
arid style of Kant when he speaks of the man who is 
conscious of an inward call to constitute himself by 
his conduct in this world the citizen of a better. 

But to those political and social philosophers who 
disdain a fugitive and cloistered virtue and ask for 
some more helpful practical lesson than this, Plato’s 
Republic offers two main suggestions. 

The first is the way of St. Francis : the acceptance 
of the simple life, which by a startling coincidence 
Glaucon, in reply to Socrates, and the Pope, in remon- 
strance with St. Francis, designate as a city of pigs.* 
But if we insist on a sophisticated civilization, a 
fevered city as Plato styles it, we shall find no remedy 
for the ills to which human nature is heir so long as our 
guiding principle is the equality of unequals (558 c) and 
the liberty of every one to do as he pleases. The only 
way of political and social salvation for such a state is 
self-sacrificing discipline, specialized efficiency, and 
government administered by men whom we have 

* Matthew Paris apud Sabatier, Life of St. Francis, p. 97 
* vade frater et quaere porcus (sic),”’ etc. 



educated for the function and whom we compel to be 

We shall not wrong them by this suppression of 
their lower selves. For they will find in it their 
highest happiness and so apprehend the full meaning 
of old Hesiod’s saying that the half is more than the 
whole.* All this, though often confounded with the 
gospel of the strong man, is in Plato’s intentions its 
diametrical opposite. Plato’s strong man is not, and 
is not permitted to be, strong for himself. And find- 
ing his own happiness in duty fulfilled he will procure 
through just and wise government as much happiness 
as government and education can bestow upon men. 
Plato never loses faith in the leadership of the right 
leaders nor in the government of scholars and idealists, 
provided always that the scholarship is really the 
highest and severest that the age can furnish, the 
idealism tempered by long apprenticeship to practical 
administration, and the mortal nature which cannot 
endure the temptations of irresponsible power held 
in check by self-denying ordinances of enforced 

Such scholars in politics and such idealists, and they 
only, can do for us what the practical politician and 
the opportunist who never even in dreams have seen 
the things that are more excellent, can never achieve. 
Think you (Rep. 500) that such a man, if called to the 
conduct of human affairs and given the opportunity 
not merely to mould his own soul but to realize and 
embody his vision in the institutions and characters of 
men, will be a contemptible artizan of sobriety and 
righteousness and all social and human virtue ? Will 
he not like an artist glance frequently back and forth 

@ Cf. Rep. 419, 420 B, c, 466 B-c. 

ee eee 


from his model, the city in the clouds, home of the 
absolute good, the true and the beautiful, to the 
mortal copy which he fashions so far as may be in its 
image? And so mixing and mingling the pigments 
on his palette he will reproduce the true measure and 
likeness of man which even old Homer hints is or 
ought to be the likeness of God. 

Tue Text 

Convention requires that something should be said 
about the text. How little need be said appears 
from the fact that the translation was originally 
made from two or three texts taken at random. The 
text of this edition was for convenience set up from 
the Teubner text, and the adjustments in either 
case have presented no difficulty. I have tried to 
indicate all really significant divergences and my 
reasons. That is all that the student of Plato’s 
philosophy or literary art needs. 

The tradition of the text of the Republicis excellent.* 
The chief manuscripts have been repeatedly collated, 
and the Republic has been printed in many critical 
editions that record variations significant and in- 
significant. The text criticism of Plato to-day is a 
game that is played for its own sake, and not for 
any important results for the text itself or the 
interpretation. The validity of a new text to-day 
depends far more on acquaintance with Platonic 
Greek and Platonic thought than on any rigour of 
the text-critical and palaeographic game. Nothing 
whatever results from the hundred and six pages of 

® Cf. the work of Alline referred to supra, p. xxv, note 5. 


“ Textkritik ’”’ in the Appendix to Professor Wila- 
mowitz’s Platon. Adam repeatedly changed his 
mind about the readings of his preliminary text 
edition when he came to write his commentary, and 
with a candour rare in the irritabile genus of text 
critics withdrew an emendation which I showed to 
be superfluous by a reference to the Sophist. 

The Jowett and Campbell edition devotes about 
a hundred pages of costly print to what are for the 
most part unessential and uncertain variations. As I 
said in reviewing it (A.J.P. xvi. pp. 229 ff.): “ There is 
something disheartening in the exiguity of the out- 
come of all this toil, and one is tempted to repeat 
Professor Jowett’s heretical dictum, that ‘such 
inquiries have certainly been carried far enough and 
need no longer detain us from more important 
subjects.’ There is really not much to be done with 
the text of Plato. The game must be played strictly 
according to the rules, but when it is played out we 
feel that it was hardly worth the midnight oil. The 
text of this edition must have cost Professor Campbell 
a considerable portion of the leisure hours of two or 
three years. Yet, as he himself says at the close of 
his interesting, if discursive, essay: ‘Were the 
corruptions and interpolations of the text of the 
Republic as numerous as recent scholars have imagined, 
the difference of meaning involved would be still 
infinitesimal. Some feature of an image might be 
obscured, or some idiomatic phrase enfeebled, but 
Plato’s philosophy would remain uninjured.’ 

“* Of the twelve passages which Professor Campbell 
regards as still open to suspicion (vol. ii. p. 115), 
only two affect the sense even slightly. 387c¢ 
dpitrewv 81 wove? ws olerat, for which our editors read 



@s oidv re (which they refer to q, and the correction 
of Par. A by q, not to Par. A, as hitherto), rejecting 
Hermann’s more vigorous 60° éry and not venturing 
to insert in the text L. C.’s suggestion, os €éred. 
In ix. 581 ©, ris *ov7s od ravy zoppw, there is no 
real difficulty if we accept, with nearly all editors, 
Graser’s ri oiwuefa and place interrogation points 
after pav@dvovta and roppw. Professor Jowett would 
retain zowpefa and take the words ris dovns ov 
wavy woppw as ironical; I do not care to try to 
convert anyone whose perceptions of Greek style 
do not tell him that this is impossible. Professor 
Campbell’s suggestion, ris aAnOwijs, of which he 
thinks Sov; a substituted gloss, does not affect the 
meaning and supplies a plausible remedy for the 
seemingly objectionable repetition of 7ovjs. But 
it is, [think, unnecessary. The Platonic philosopher 
thinks that sensual pleasures are no pleasures. Cf. 
Philebus 44. c Gore kai atts tovto airas Td exaywydv 
yourevpa ody Soviv civat. The difficulties in 388 £, 
359 c, 567 EB, 590 pv, 603 c, 615 c are too trifling for 
further debate. 439 E roré dxotoas Tt Tic TEtw ToUTy is 
certainly awkward. L. C.’s suggestion, ov micrevw 
totr», with changed reference of rovrw, equally so. 
533 E 6 av povov dynXoi zpds Thy ew cadnveia 6 Eyer 
év Yvxq is impossible, and the ingenuity is wasted 
that is spent upon it in the commentary to this 
result: ‘ An expression which may indicate with a 
clearness proportioned to the mental condition that 
of which it speaks as existing in the mind.’ All we 
want is the thought of Charmides 163 p dyjAov de 
povov ed 6 te av hepys Tovvopa Ste av A€yys, and that 
is given by the only tolerable text yet proposed, 
that of Hermann: dANX é av povov dnXoi xpos tHv eEo 



cadnverav & Aéeyer ev Yuy7 (dpKérer), which is ignored 
by our editors and which is indeed too remote from 
the mss. to be susceptible of proof. In 5628 the 
unwarranted tréprAovros, which B. J. defends more 
suo, may be emended by deleting izep or by L. C.’s 
plausible suggestion, rov wAodros. In 568 p L. C.’s 
suggestion, twAovpevwr, is as easy a way as any of 
securing the required meaning which grammar 
forbids us to extract from drodopevor. 

“ Of the 29 passages in which the present text 
relies on conjectures by various hands, none affects 
the sense except possibly the obvious ra:otv for racw 
(494 B and 431 c), Schneider’s palmary kai ériva 
padiora for Kai ere pddwra, 554 B, Graser’s ri 
oiwpeba, 581 pv, Vermehren’s yatpwv Kai dvryepaiver, 
which restores concinnity in 401 ©, and L. C.’s da 
tov bis, 440 c, for 3:4 7d, an emendation which was 
pencilled on the margin of my Teubner text some 
years ago. The others restore a paragogic v or a 
dropped ay or an iota subscript, or smooth out an 
anacoluthon. Professor Campbell himself suggests 
some fifteen emendations in addition to the one 
admitted to the text (vol. ii. p. 123); three or four 
of these have already been considered. Of the 
others the most important are the (in the context) 
cacophonous dgiws, 496 a, for af.ov which is better 
omitted altogether, with Hermann; ¢yyts te teivwv 
Tov Tov awpatos for «ivar, 518 p, which is clever 
and would commend itself but for a lingering doubt 
whether the phrase had not a half-humorous sug- 
gestion in Plato’s usage; and 7 ovx (sic q)... 
aXXoiav te [Stallb. for roc] gjoes, 5004. It is 
unnecessary to follow Professor Campbell in his 
recension of the superfluous emendations of Cobet, 

xl viii 



Madvig and others not admitted into the text. The 
man who prints an emendation that is not required 
but is merely possible Greek in the context is a 
thief of our time and should be suppressed by a 
conspiracy of silence. I could wish, however, that 
our editors had followed Hermann in admitting 
Nagelsbach’s ér: ddvvayia, supported by a quotation 
from Iamblichus, for é@ ddvvayia in 532 B-c. ér 
dduvapia BAEerev “to look powerlessly,’ i.e. ‘to be 
without the power to see,’ as our editors construe, 
after Schneider, makes large demands on our faith 
in the flexibility of Greek idiom, and Stallbaum’s 
‘bei dem Unvermégen zu sehen’ is not much 
better. Moreover, the é7t: adds a touch that is 
needed; cf. 516 a zporov pév, ete. For the rest, 
all this matter, with much besides, is conscientiously 
repeated in the commentary, though exhaustiveness 
is after all not attained, and many useful readings 
recorded in Stallbaum or Hermann are ignored. I 
have noted the following points, which might (without 
much profit) be indefinitely added to. In 332 no 
notice is taken of the plausible zporoAcueiv approved 
by Ast and Stephanus. In 3658 éay pa Kai doxa, 
which has sufficient ms. authority, is better than éay 
kai pa Sox. The thought is : ‘I shall profit nothing 
from being just (even) if I seem the opposite.’ 
What our editors mean by saying that éav kai pi) 
do0x6 is more idiomatic I cannot guess. In 365 p, 
kal (ovd Jowett and Campbell) yyiv pednréov tod 
AavGavev, I think the consensus of the mss. could be 
defended, despite the necessity for a negative that 
nearly all editors have felt here. The argument of the 
entire passage would run: There exist (1) political 
clubs ézi 76 Aav@dvev, and (2) teachers of persuasion 



who will enable us to evade punishment if detected. 
But, you will say, we cannot (1) elude or ©) constrain 
the gods. The answer is (transferring the question 
to the higher sphere), as for gods, perhaps (1) they 
do not exist or are careless of mankind, or (2) can 
be persuaded or bought off by prayers and cere- 
monies. Accordingly, we must either (1) try to 
escape detection, as on the previous supposition, 
before the gods were introduced into the argument, 
or (2) invoke priests and hierophants as in the former 
case teachers of the art of persuasion. The logic of 
kat ypiv peAntéeov Tod AavOdvev is loose, but it is quite 
as good as that of «i 2) «iciv as an answer to Geods 
ovre AavOdvey Svvardy, and it is not absolutely neces- 
sary to read ovd’, ovxovy ti or dyeAnréov. The xat 
of «ai ajiv indicates an illogical but perfectly natural 
antithesis between ‘ us’ on the present supposition 
and the members of the political clubs above. In 
378 p our editors follow Baiter in punctuating after 
ypavol. The antithesis thus secured between wavdia 
evOds and mperBurépors yryvopevors (an yevopevors ?) 
favours this. The awkwardness of the four times 
repeated ambiguous xai, and the difficulty of the 
dative with Aoyoro.eiv and the emphasis thus lost of 
the triplet kai yépovor Kal ypavoi Kal rperPurépors 
ytyopévors, are against it. 3974, L. C. accepts 
Madvig’s (Schneider’s ?) pupjoerar for dimyijoeras, 
adversante B. J., but duyyijoerae seems to be favoured 
by the balance of the sentence: advra te padAAov 
Sinyjoetar Kal... oifoerar Gore TdvTAa ertxetpyoe 
pupeir Oar. 442 cooddv 8€ ye exeivy TO TpLKPO péper 
TO 0 Hpxé 7 ev abtd cal ratra mapiyyeAdAev Exov 
ad Ké«eivo, ete. Our editors seem to feel no difficulty 
in the r@ 6, etc., nor do they note the omission of 




7 by Par. K and Mon. A simple remedy would be 
to omit the 7@ before 6 and insert it after rapiy- 
yeAAev, reading 79 €xetv. In 451 a-B, in reading Gore 
e@ (for ov) we tapapvOeci, our editors, here as elsewhere, 
over-estimate the possibilities of Socratic irony. 
500 a. In arguing against the repetition of ¢\Ao‘ev in 
a different sense, 499 £-500 a, our editors should not 
have ignored the reading of M, dA2’ oiav (recorded, 
it is true, in the footnotes to the text), which, with 
the pointing and interrogation marks of Hermann, 
yields a much more vivacious and idiomatic text than - 
that adopted here. Moreover, aAAa droxpuweicGar 
fits the defiant oix ad Soxei above much better if 
taken in the sense ‘ contradict us ’ than in the sense 
“change their reply... In 521c Hermann’s oica 
éxdvodos (after Iamblichus) is the only readable idio- 
matic text here. Only desperate ingenuity can con- 

_ strue the others. In 606c the text or footnotes 

should indicate Hermann’s 65) (for 6), which the 

_ commentary rightly prefers.” 

These observations are not intended as a renewal 

_ of Jowett’s attack on text criticism or an illiberal 

disparagement of an indispensable technique. They 

_ merely explain why it was not thought necessary to 

_ waste the limited space of this edition by reprinting 

information which would interest a half dozen 

specialists at the most and which they know where to 

_ find in more detail than could possibly be given here. 

The Republic has been endlessly edited, commented, 

| summarized, and paraphrased (cf. supra, p. vii). The 

chief editions are enumeratedin Ueberweg-Praechter, 
Die Philosophie des Altertums, 12th ed., Berlin (1926), 

a pp. 190 ff. Schneidewin’s edition is curt, critical, and 




sagacious. Stallbaum’s Latin commentary is still 
useful for idioms and parallel passages. The two 
most helpful editions are English. The great three- 
volume work of Jowett and Campbell was critically 
reviewed by me in A.J.P. vol. xvi. pp. 223 ff., and 
from another point of view in the New York Nation, 
vol. lxi. (1895) pp. 82-84. Adam’s painstaking and 
faithful commentary does not supersede, but in- 
dispensably supplements, Jowett and Campbell’s, 
Apelt’s German translation is, with a few exceptions, 
- substantially correct, and the appended notes supply 
most of the information which the ordinary reader 

The history of the Platonic text is most amply set 
forth in the excellent and readable book of Alline 
(Histoire du texte de Platon, par Henri Alline, Paris, 
1915), Other general discussions of the text and its 
history are: H. Usener, Unser Platontext (Kleine 
Schriften, vol. ii. pp. 104-162) ; M. Schanz, Studien zur 
Geschichte des platonischen Teaxtes, Wiirzburg, 1874; 
Wohlrab, “‘ Die Platon-Handschriften und ihre gegen- 
seitigen Beziehungen,” Jahrbiicher fiir klassische Philo- 
logie, Suppl. 15 (1887), pp. 641-728. Cf. further 
Ueberweg-Praechter, vol. i., appendix pp. 67 ff. The 
manuscripts of Plato are enumerated end described 
by Jowett and Campbell, vol. ii. pp. 67-131, Essay 
II. ‘‘ On the Text of this Edition of Plato’s Republic” ; 
less fully by Adam, who did not live to write a pro- 
posed introductory volume supplementing his com- 
mentary (The Republic of Plato, vol. i. pp. xiii-xvi) ; 
and, sufficiently for the ordinary student, by Maurice 
Croiset in the Budé Plato, vol. i. pp. 14-18. 

The best manuscript is thought to be Parisinus 
graecus 1807 (ninth century), generally designated 



have lost my voice.* But as it is, at the very moment 
when he began to be exasperated by the course 
of the argument I glanced at him first, so that I 
became capable of answering him and said with a 
slight tremor: “ Thrasymachus, don’t be harsh ® with 
us. If I and my friend have made mistakes in the 
consideration of the question, rest assured that it is 
unwillingly that we err. For you surely must not 
suppose that while* if our quest were for gold? we 
would never willingly truckle to one another and 
make concessions in the search and so spoil our 
chances of finding it, yet that when we are searching 
for justice, a thing more precious than much fine 
gold, we should then be so foolish as to give way to 
one another and not rather do our serious best to 
have it discovered. You surely must not suppose 
that, my friend. But you see it is our lack of ability 
that is at fault. It is pity then that we should far 
more reasonably receive from clever fellows like 
you than severity.” 

XI. And he on hearing this gave a great guffaw and 
laughed sardonically and said, ““ Ye gods! here we 
have the well-known irony ° of Socrates, and I knew 
it and predicted that when it came to replying you 
would refuse and dissemble and do anything rather 
than answer any question that anyone asked you.” 
“That’s because you are wise, Thrasymachus, and 
so you knew very well that if you asked a man how 
many are twelve, and in putting the question warned 
him: don’t you be telling me, fellow, that twelve 
589 £, 600 c-p, Crito 46 p, Laws 647 c, 931 c, Protag. 325 B-c, 
Phaedo 68 a, Thompson on Meno 91 8. 

4 OF, Heracieit. fr. 22 Diels, and Ruskin, King’s Treasuries 

“The physical type of wisdom, gold,” Psalms xix. 10. 
* Cf. Symp. 2168, and Gomperz, Greek Thinkers iii. p. 277. 


pnd’ Ste tpis térrapa pd’ dru é€dkis Svo pnd 
OTL TeTpaKis Tpia: Ws odK amodéEopmat gov, eat 
tovabra gddvaphs: SHAov, ofuar, col wv dre ovdels 
amoxpwotto 7@ ottw muvOavouévw. GAN et ao 
el7ev: & Opacvpaye, mas Aێyers; ut) AroKpivwan 
Gv mpocines pndév; mdrepov, @ Oavpdore, pnd 
el ToUTwy TL Tvyydver dv, GAN’ Erepov eimw TL TOD 
C adnfots; mds A€yers; rt dv adr@ eles mpds 
tatra; Klev, &¢n: cs 81) dpovov tobro éxeivy. 
Ovdsév ye Kwddver, Fv 8 eyd: ef 8 obv Kal pH 
€oTw dpowov, daiverar S¢€ TH epwrybévre Towdrov, 
hrtov T. adrov ole. dmoKpwetcbar 7d dawdpevov 
€avT@, édv Te tyets amayopedwuev edv TE PHS 
"Ao tu odv, éby, Kal od odTw Toujoes; @v eya 
azeimov, Tovtwy 7. amoxpwet; Ovdx av Oavpdoapt, 
hv & eyd, et por oxepapévm ovtw Soéeaev. Ti 
D ody, edn, av éeym deifw érépay amdxpiow mapa 
mdoas tavTas mept Sixavoodvns BeAtiw tovTwr; 
ti afwois mabetv; Ti addo, fv 8 ey, 7 dmep 
TMpoonke. maaxew TH pt) €lddTL; mpoonke dé 
mov pabeiv mapa tod eiddtos: Kal €ya odv TobTo 
aéia mabeiv. “Hdds yap el, edn: adda mpos TO 
pabety Kal amdéticov dapytpiov. Odxoby émeddv 
prot yévnrat, elzov. *AAX’ €otw, dn 6 TAadcwv’ 

* In “American,” “nerve.” Socrates’ statement that 
the radety “due him” is yuabeiv (gratis) affects Thrasy- 
machus as the dicasts were affected by the proposal in the 
Apology that his punishment should be—to dine at the City 
Hall. The pun on the legal formula eculd be remotels 
rendered: ‘*In addition to the recovery of your wits, you 
must pay a fine.’ Piato constantly harps on the taking 



is twice six or three times four or six times two 
or four times three, for I won’t accept any such § 
drivel as that from you as an answer—it was obvious : 
I fancy to you that no one could give an answer to. 
a question framed in that fashion. Suppose he had 
said to you, “ Thrasymachus, what do you mean ? 
Am I not to give any of the prohibited answers, not 
even, do you mean to say, if the thing really is one 
of these, but must I say something different from 
the truth, or what do you mean?” What would 
have been your answer to him?” “ Humph!” 
said he, “ how very like the two cases are!” “ There 
is nothing to prevent,” said I; “ yet even granted 
that they are not alike, yet if it appears to the 
person asked the question that they are alike, do 
you suppose that he will any the less answer what 
to him, whether we forbid him or whether 
we don’t?” “Is that, then,” said he, “ what you 
are going todo? Are you going to give one of the 
forbidden answers?” ‘I shouldn’t be surprised,”’ 
I said, “ if on reflection that would be my view.” 
“What then,” he said, “if I show you another 
answer about justice differing from all these, a better 
one—what penalty do you think you deserve?” 
“Why, what else,’ said I, “than that which it 
befits anyone who is ignorant to suffer? It befits 
him, I presume, to learn from the one who does 
know. That then is what I propose that I should 
suffer.” “I like your simplicity,’* said h~, “ but 
in addition to ‘learning’ you must pay a- > of 
money.” “ Well, I will when I have got it,” 1 | id. 
* It is there,” said Glaucon: “if money is all tiat 

of pay by the Sophists, but Thrasymachus is trying to 






aN’ eveka, dpyupiov, & Opacdpaxe, Aéye: mdvres 
yap Tuets Zoxparer etgoloopev. Ildvu ye, ofyar, 
4 8 6s, wa Lwxpdrys To eiwbos Svampaénrar, 
avros bev 47) dmoxpivnrat, dAAov 8 azmoKxpwo- 
[Lévov AapBavy Adyov Kat eeyxn- Jas yop av, 
ebay eye, ® Bet0Te, tls amoxpivatto mp@rov 
fev pn €ld@s pnde pdokwy eidévar, emeuTa, et Tt 
Kal oleTau mrepl qovrwy, dev Levov avr@ ein, 
omws pnder € epet vy jyetrat, on’ dv8pos ov gavrov; 
aAAa oe o7) padMov eikos Aéyew* od yap cy) 7s 
eldevau Kal €xew eirretv, pa oov dMus mote, GAN’ 
ep.ol Te xapilov dmroKpwopevos Kat pn dbbovyions 
kat [Aavcwva tovee Suddfau Kal tovs aAdous. 
XII. Eizovros dé pov tabTa 6 te TAatxwr & kal 
oi dAdo ed€ovTo adrod pan aAAws movetv" kal 6 
Opactpaxyos davepos pev Hv emBunay eizretv, wv” 
eDdOKULTTELEV, Hyovpevos exew dard prow may- 
KaAnye mpooemouetro dé diAoverkeivy mpds TO epme 
elvat TOV dmroKpwvOpLevov. tedeuTa@v Se Evvexdpnve, 
Kdmevra Airn 87, €bn, 7) UwxKpdrovs oogia, adTov 
pev pry eBéeAew SiddoKerw, Tapa. de TeV dw 
TEpLLOVTa pavbdvew Kal ToUTWY pndé yxdpw azro- 
diddvat. “Ore per, i 8 eye, pavOdven Tapa ° TOV 
aAAwy, ohn Oh eles, 2) Opactpwaxe: OTL be ob pe 
dys xapw exrtivew, pevder. extiv yap donv 
Svvapan Svvapat dé émraweiv povor: xpypata yap 
ovK Exon" ws dé mpolvpes TobTo dp, eav tis pow 
Soxfj <b déyew, €d cioe avrixa 8 pada, emevday 
dmoxpivyn* oluar yap oe «d epeiv. “Axove 57, % 

a Grudging. ” Cf. Laches 200 B. > Of. Cratyl. 391 B. 
¢ Socrates’ poverty (A pol. 38 a-B) was denied by some later 
writers who disliked to have him classed with the Cynics. 



stands in the way, Thrasymachus, go on with your 
speech. We will all contribute for Socrates.” ‘‘ Oh 
yes, of course,” said he, “so that Socrates may 
contrive, as he always does, to evade answering 
himself but may cross-examine the other man and 
refute his replies.” “ Why, how,” I said, “ my dear 
fellow, could anybody answer if ‘th the first place 
he did not know and did not even profess to know, 
and secondly even if he had some notion of the 
matter, he had been told by a man of weight that 
he mustn’t give any of his suppositions as an answer ? 
Nay, it is more reasonable that you should be the 
speaker. For you do affirm that you know and are 
able to tell. Don’t be obstinate, but do me the 
fayour to reply and don’t be chary ¢ of your wisdom, 
and instruct Glaucon here and the rest of us.” 

XII. When I had spoken thus Glaucon and the 
others urged him not to be obstinate. It was quite 
plain that Thrasymachus was eager to speak in order 
that he might do himself credit, since he believed that 
he had a most excellent answer to our question. 
But he demurred and pretended to make a point 
of my being the respondent. Finally he gave way 
and then said, “Here you have the wisdom of 
Socrates, to refuse himself to teach, but go about 
and learn from others and not even pay thanks? 
therefor.” ‘‘ That I learn from others,” I said, ‘‘ you 
said truly, Thrasymachus. But in saying that I do 
not pay thanks you are mistaken. I pay as much 
as lam able. And I am able only to bestow praise. 
For money I lack.° But that I praise right willingly 
those who appear to speak well you will well know 
forthwith as soon as you have given your answer. 
For 1 think that you will speak well.” ‘‘ Hearken 



5 és. gyi yap eyo elvat TO Sixaov odK aAXo Tt 
7 TO TOO KpeiTTovos Evadépov. adda ti odK 
> > 

emratvets; GAN ovK eOeAjces. “Edav pdbw ye 
mparov, epnv, Ti réyers* vov yap ovmw olda. To 
Tod Kpeitrovos gis Evudepov Sixavov <lvaw. kal 
TobTo, a) Opacvpaxe, Tl MOTE A€yets ; od yap Tov 
TO ye Towvde dis: et IlovAvddyas Hudv KpeitTwv 
6 TayKpatiacTis Kal adit@ Evudeper TA Boeva Kpea 
mpos TO GHpa, TOOTO TO atTiov elvat Kal Hiv Tots 
7 > / / A \ Fe 

yTToGW exeivov Evudépov dua Kai dikaov. Bde- 
Avpos yap el, Edn, ® Ud«pates, Kal tavry b7o0- 

/ “ / / ‘ /, 

AapBavers, # av Kaxouvpyyjoais pddvora Tov Adyov. 
Odvdapds, @ dapiote, tv 0° éyw: adda caddorepov 
> ‘ / / > 2 > ” a ~ 
eimé, ti Aéyets. Elz’ odx« olof’, edn, Str tadv 
moAewv ai wev Tupavvodvrat, ai dé SnuoKpatodvrat, 
at d5€ dpiotoxpatobyvra; Ids yap od; Ovdxodv 

* For this dogmatic formulation of a definition of. 
Theaetet. 151 &. 

> To idealists law is the perfection of reason, or vod 
diavouy, Laws 7144; “her seat is the bosom of God” 
(Hooker). To the political positivist there is no justice 
outside of positive law, and ‘law is the command of a 
political superior to a political inferior.” ‘* Whatsoever 
any state decrees and establishes is just for the state while 
it is in force,” Theaetet. 177 D. The formula “ justice is the 
advantage of the superior” means, as explained in Laws 714, 
that the ruling class legislates in its own interest, that is, 
to keep itself in power. ‘This interpretation is here drawn 
out of Thrasymachus by Socrates’ gine misapprehen- 
sions (¢f. further Pascal, Pensées iv. 4, **la commodité du 
souverain.” Leibniz approves Taiayuhed s definition: 
*‘justum potentiori utile . . . nam Deus ceteris potentior!”’), 

¢ The unwholesomeness of this diet for the ordinary man 
proves nothing for Plato’s alleged vegetarianism. The 
Athenians ate but little meat. 



and hear then,” said he. “TI affirm that the just 
is nothing else than* the advantage of the stronger.” 
Well, why don’t you applaud? Nay, you'll do any- 
thing but that.” ‘“ Provided only I first understand 
your meaning,” said I; “ for I don’t yet apprebend 
it. The advantage of the stronger is what you affirm 
the just to be. But what in the world do you mean 

this? I presume you don’t intend to affirm this, 
that if Polydamas the pancratiast is stronger than 
we are and the flesh of beeves* is advantageous for 
him, for his body, this viand is also for us who are 
weaker than he both advantageous and just.” ‘‘ You 
are a buffoon,’ Socrates, and take my statement ¢ in 
the most detrimental sense.’ . “* Not at all, my dear 
fellow,” said I; “I only want you to make your 
meaning plainer.””* “ Don’t you know then,” said 
he, “that some cities are governed by tyrants, in 
others democracy rules, in others aristocracy?” ? 
“ Assuredly.” “And is not this the thing that is 

- 4 The Greek is stronger—a beastly cad. A common term 
of abuse inthe orators. Cf. Aristoph. Frogs 465, Theophrast. 
Char. xvii. (Jebb). 

* Cf. 392 c, 3948, 424c, Meno 78 c, Euthydem. 295 c, 

Gorg. 451 A dixaiws irokauBdvers, “‘ you take my meaning 
fairly.” For complaints of unfair argument cf. 340 p, Charm. 
166 c, Meno 80 a, Theaetet. 167 ©, Gorg. 461 B-c, 482 E. 
- 4 This is the point. Thrasymachus is represented as 
challenging assent before explaining his meaning, and 
Socrates forces him to be more explicit by jocosely putting 
a perverse interpretation on his words. Similarly in Gorg. 
451 £, 453 B, 489 p, 490 c, Laws 714 cc. To the misunder- 
standing of such dramatic passages is due the impression 
of hasty readers that Plato is a sophist. 

* These three forms of government are mentioned by 
Pindar, Pyth. ii. 86, Aeschin. In Ctes.6. See 445 p, Whib- 
ley, Greek Oligarchies, and Unity of Plato’s Thought, p. 62. 



or K a? ee 4 4X i. 4 ii , 
TobTo Kpatei év exdorn ToAe, Td apxov; Idvu ye. 
E Tiderau 5€ ye tods vdpovs ExdoTn 7) apxn mpos TO 
ea / , \ 
adth gévudéepov, Snuokpatia pev SynuoKpatiKods, 
\ A 
Tupavvis dé TupavviKovs, Kal at adAat ovTw* Oewevar 
A > lol a 
dé amépnvav tobro Sikavov Tots apxopevots elvar, 
\ / tA \ A 
To odict Evudépov, Kal Tov tovtov exBaivovra 
/ ~ ~ 
KoAdlovaw ws mapavomotvTd Te Kat ddiKodvTa, 
a> Ss > , Sad / a“ , > c / 
tobr obv é€otiv, ® BéAtioTe, 6 A€yw ev amdoats 
339 Tais moAcou Tavrov elvar Sikatov, TO THS KafeoTy- 
/ > a / 
Kvias apyhs Evpdéepov avrn dé mov Kpatel, wore 
/ a > ~ = 
EvpBaive TO op0ds Aoyilouwévw mavtaxod elvar 
\ \ ~ 
TO avTo Sikaov, TO Tod Kpeittovos Evpdepor. 
Nov, jv & éeyd, Ewabov 6 réyeis: <i SE aAnbes 7 
/ /, A A 
py, metpdcouas pabeiv. to Evudépov pev odv, @ 
Opacdpaxe, Kal od amexpivw Sixaov elvat- Katrot 
v > a A 
Euovye amnyopeves Stws pt) TOTO dmoKpwoiwnv’ 
, \ \ [ae ‘ a , 
B mpdceort Sé 81) adrde to Tod Kpeitrovos. Lpt- 
, ” ” ~ 
Kpad ye tows, edn, mpooOnKkyn. Odmw dfAov odd’ 
ei peydAn: GAN’ St ev Toro oKxentéov et adnOi 
/ ~ > \ 
Adyeis, SHAov. erreid7) yap Evudépov ye tu elvas 

® xparet with emphasis to suggest xpeirrwv. Cf. Menex. 
238 p, Xen. Mem. i. 2.43. Platonic dialectic proceeds by 
minute steps and linked synonyms. Cf. 333 a, 339 a, 342 c, 
346 a, 353 £, 354 a-B, 369 c, 370 a-B, 379 B, 380-381, 394 B, 
400 c, 402 v, 412 pv, 433-434, 486, 585 c, Meno 77 B, Lysis 
215 8, where L. & S. miss the point. 

> On this view justice is simply 7d véuimov (Xen. Mem. iv. 
4. 12; ef. Gorg. 504 pv), This is the doctrine of the ** Old 
Oligarch,” [Xen.] Rep. Ath. 2. Against this conception of 
class domination as political justice, Plato (Laws 713 ff.) and 
Aristotle (Pol. iii.7) protest. Cf. Arnold, Culture and Anarchy. 



strong and has the mastery* in each—the ruli 
party?” “ Certainly.” “ And each form of pare: 
ment enacts the laws with a view tq its own advantage, 
a democracy democratic laws and tyranny autocratic 
and the others likewise, and by so legislating they 
proclaim that the just for their subjects is that which | 
is for their—the rulers’—advantage and the man 
who deviates” from this law they chastise as a law- 
breaker and a wrongdoer. This, then, my good sir, | 
is what I understand as the identical principle of 
justice that obtains in all states—the advantage — 
of the established government. This I presume | 
you will admit holds power and is stroug, so that, 
if one reasons rightly, it works out that the just is _ 
the same thing everywhere, the advantage of the ; 
stronger.” “‘ Now,” said I, “I have learned your 
meaning, but whether it is true or not I have to try 
to learn. The advantageous, then, is also your 
reply, Thrasymachus, to the question, what is the 
just—though you forbade me to give that answer. 
But you add thereto that of the stronger.” “A 

ifling addition? perhaps you think it,” he said. 
“Tt is not yet clear * whether it is a big one either; 
but that we must inquire whether what you say is 
true, is clear. For since I too admit that the just 

ii.: “We only conceive of the State as something 

equivalent to the class in occupation of the executive govern- 
ment ” etc. 

¢ Thrasymachus makes it plain that he, unlike Meno (71 £), 
Euthyphro (5 ff.), Laches (191 £), Hippias (Hipp. Maj. 286 ff.), 
and eyen Theaetetus (146 c-p) at first, understands the nature 
of a definition. 

2 Of. Laches 182 c. 

* For the teasing or challenging repetition cf. 394 8, 470 
B-c, 487 £, 493 a, 500 B, 505 p, 514 B, 517 c, 523 a, 527 ©, 
» Lysis 203 8, Soph. 0.7. 327. 

VOL. I E +9 


kal éyd dporoy® 76 Sixasov, ad 5é mpooribns Kal 
adto dis elvar 7d To Kpeittovos, éyw de ayvod, 
oxertéov 64. Ukdrer, edn. 

XIII. Tair’ dora, jv & eye. Kal pot eimé- 
od Kai meiBecbar pévtor Tots apyovor Sikaov 7s 

Cecivar; "Eywye. Ildrepov 8¢ dvapdpryrot eiow ot 
apxovres ev tats méAeow éxdotats 7 ofol te Kal 
dpuapteiv; Ildvtws mov, edn, olot tt Kai apapreiv. 
Odxodv emtyeipotvres vopous TiWévat Tods pev 
6pbads riOdacr, rods Sé twas odK dpbds; Oipat 
»” ‘ ‘ > ~ Ss A \ / t Me | 
éywye. Tod 5€ dp0&s dpa 70 7a Evpdepovra €ote 
a ~ ” 
tibecbas éavtois, TO 5é pur) OpOds akdudopa; 7 
m&s déyers; Ottws. “A 8 av OGvtar, momntéov 
tots apxopevois, Kal TodTS eat Td Sixarov; Ilds 
D yap ov; Od pdvov dpa Sikadv éort Kata TOV Gov 
Aéyov 7d Tod Kpeirrovos Evpdépov Troreiv, aAAd 
Kat todvavtiov 7d pr) Evpdepov. Ti rA&yers av; 
édn. “A av Aéyets, Ewovye SoKd: cxormdpev Se 
BéAriov. ody wpoddyntat tods apxovTas Tots 
apxouévots mpoorarrovras moveiv arta eviore Sia- 
paptdvew tod éavtois BeAtiorov, a 8° av mpoo- 
TaTTWOW ot apxovTes, Sikatov elvar Tots apxopevots 

* For Plato’s so-called utilitarianism or eudaemonism see 
457 8, Unity of Plato’s Thought, pp. 21-22, Gomperz, ii. 
p- 262. He would have nearly accepted Bentham’s state- 
ment that while the proper end of government is the greatest 
happiness of the greatest number, the actual end of every 
okie ent is the greatest happiness of the governors. Cf. 

eslie Stephen, English Utilitarianism, i. p. 282, ii. p. 89. 

* This profession of ignorance may have been a trait of 
the real Socrates, but in Plato it is a dramatic device for the 
evolution of the argument. 

¢ The argument turns on the opposition between the real 
(i.e. ideal) and the mistakenly supposed interest of the 
rulers. See on 334 c. 



is something that is of advantage *—but you are for 
making an addition and affirm it to be the advantage 
of the stronger, while I don’t profess to know, we 
must pursue the inquiry. “ Inquire away,” he said. 

XIII. “I will do so,” said I. “Tell me, then; you 
affirm also, do you not, that obedience to rulers is 
just?” “Ido.” “ May I ask whether the rulers in 
the various states are infallible ° or capable sometimes 
of error?” “Surely,” he said, “ they are liable to 
err.”” “ Then in their attempts at legislation they 
enact some laws rightly and some not rightly, do 
they not?” ‘So I suppose.” ‘ And by rightly 
we are to understand for their advantage, and by 
wrongly to their disadvantage ? Do you mean that 
or not?” “That.” “ But whatever they enact? 
must be performed by their subjects and is justice ? ” 
“ Of course.” ‘‘ Then on your theory it is just not 
only to do what is the advantage of the stronger but 
also the opposite, what is not to his advantage.” 
“ What's that you’re saying ?*”’ he replied. “ What 
you yourself are saying,/ I think. Let us consider 
it more closely. Have we not agreed that the rulers 
in giving orders to the ruled sometimes mistake their 
own advantage, and that whatever the rulers enjoin 
it is just for the subjects to perform? Was not that 

# Cf. supra 338 © and Theaetet. 177 v. 

* Ti déyes oH; is rude. See Blaydes on Aristoph. Clouds 
1174. Thesuspicion that he is being refuted makes Thrasy- 
machus rude again. But ef. Euthydem. 290 £. 

* Cf. Berkeley, Divine Visual Language, 13: ‘* The con- 
clusions are yours as much as mine, for you were led to 
them by your own concessions.” See on 334 pv, Ale. I. 112- 
113. a misunderstanding of this passage and 344k, 
Herbert Spencer (Data of Ethics, § 19) the statement 
that Plato (and Aristotle), like Hobbes, made state enact- 
ments the source of right and wrong. 



Trovetv; Tabr’ ody wpoAdyntrar; Olnat éywye, edn. 

E Otov rover, Av 8 eyd, Kal to aévpdopa moveiv 


Tots dpxovol te Kal Kpeitroat Sikavov evar wyo- 
Aoyfjcbai cou, Grav of ev apxYovtes akovTEs KAKA 
aitots mpoordttwot, Tots dé Sikavov «ivar is 
Tatra movi, a exeivor. mpocétagav: dpa ToTE, @ 
cofwtate MOpactpaxe, odK avayKatov ovpPaivew 
avro ovTwot Sicavov elvat movety Tovvavriov  O 
ov Aéyets ; TO yap Too KpetTTovos aévppopov Sirou 
Tpoordrrerat Tots iTTOGL moetv. Nai pa A’, 
egy, ® Lw«pates, 6 IloAguapxos, aadéotara ye. 
"Eav ot y’, bn, abt@ paptupyjons, 6 KAetopadv 
vrrohaBev. Kal ri, én, detrau Hdprupos ; avtos 
yap Opacvpaxos oporoyet TOUS pev dpxovras 
eviore €avTois Kaka mpoorarrew, tots de apxo- 
pévois Sikasov elvas TadTa mroveiv. To yap 7d 
KeAevopeva mrovetv, @ TloAguapye, bd TOV apxov- 
Tov Sicavov elvar Gero Opactdpayos. Kai yap 
TO Too KpeiTToves, & KAecroddv, Evudépov Sixarov 
elvat Beto. tadita dé apdpotepa Oéuevos cdpodrd- 
ynoev ad éeviore Tovs Kpeittous Ta adTots a€vupopa 
KeAevelv TOUS ATTOVS TE Kal apxopEevous TroLeEiV. 
ex d€ TovTwy THY dpodoyidv oddev paAdAov TO Tod 
KpeitTovos Evudepov Siavov av etn H TO pa) 
Evpdépov. Add’, éhn 6 ) Krerropav, TO Too Kpetr- 

tovos Evydéepov eAeyev 6 aWyotTro 6 KpeitTwY avT@ 

Socrates is himself a little rude. 
Cf. Gorgias 495 pv. 
Cf. Laches 215 ©, Phaedo 62 x. 
It is familiar Socratic doctrine that the only witness 
needed in argument is the admission of your opponent. Cf. 
Gorg. 472 a-B. 

© ra Kedevoueva moev is a term of praise for obedience to 


eo 8 



admitted?” “I think it was,” he replied. “Then 
you will have to think,* I said, that to do what is dis- 
advantageous to the rulers and the stronger has been 
admitted by you to be just in the case when the 
rulers unwittingly enjoin what is bad for themselves, 
while you affirm that it is just for the others to do 
what they enjoined. In that way does not this con- 
clusion inevitably follow, my most sapient® Thrasy- 
machus, that it is just to do the very opposite ° of what 
you say? For it is in that case surely the dis- 
advantage of the stronger or superior that the 
inferior are commanded to perform.” “Yes, by Zeus, 
Socrates,” said Polemarchus, “nothing could be 
more conclusive.” ‘ Of course,” said Cleitophon, 
breaking in, “ if you are his witness.” ? ‘ What need | 
is there of a witness?” Polemarchus said. “‘ Thrasy- 
machus himself admits that the rulers sometimes — 
enjoin what is evil for themselves and yet says that 
it is just for the subjects to do this.” “That, 
Polemarchus, is because Thrasymachus laid it down 
that it is just to obey the orders® of the rulers.” 
“Yes, Cleitophon, but he also took the position 
that the advantage of the stronger is just. And 
after these two assumptions he again admitted that 
the stronger sometimes bid the inferior and their 
subjects do what is to the disadvantage of the rulers. 
And from these admissions the just would no more 
be the advantage of the stronger than the contrary.” 
“ O well,” said Cleitophon, “ by the advantage of the 
superior he meant what the superior supposed to be 
lawful authority, and of disdain for a people or state that 
takes orders from another. Cleitophon does not apprehend 
the argument and, thinking only of the last clause, reaffirms 

the definition in the form ‘it is just to do what rulers bid.” 
Polemarchus retorts: ** And (I was right,) for he (also). . .” 



Eupdépew TobTo Tmointéov civat TO HrTovt, Kal TO 
dixaov tobTo érifero. *AXA’ ody ovTws, 4 8 ds 
Coé [loAduapyos, eAdyero. Ovddev, Fv 8 eyd, & 
IloAcuapxe, Sade per, GAN ei viv ottw Héyer 
pacvpaxos, ovTws adrob amodexupeba. 

XIV. Kai po eiré, & Opactpaye: todo ix 6 
eBovAov Aéyew TO dixacov, TO Too KpetTTovos Up- 
pépov Soxoby elvat T® kpelttov, éav TE Evphepy 
€dv TE £7; ovr oe paper déeyew; “Hewora y’, 
epn: adda KpeitTw je oler Kadciv tov e€apapra- 
vovta, otav e€ayaptdvn; "Eywye, elzov, wynv 
ae Toto Aéyewv, STE TOvs ApyovTas apordyets OVK 
dvapapTyTous elvae, aAAd Tt Kal efapaprdveu. 
LuKopavrns yap el, edn, @ LaiKpares, év tots 
Adyous: evel abrixa tarpov Kadeits ov Tov efapap- 
TaVOVTA TEpL Tovs Kdpvovras Kar” avro TotTo 6 
efapapraver; 7 AoytoTiKdy, Os av ev Aoyropa@ 
dpapravn, TOTE OTav dpapTavn, KaTa TavTHY TIV 
dpaprian ; aad’, ofwat, A€yopev TO pratt ovTws, 
ort é taTpos ebijwapre Kal 0 doyworijs efjpapre 
Kal 6 Ypapparvorys: 70 8’, olat, € Exaoros Tourwv, 
kal? Gcov tobr’ e€otw 6 mpocayopevopuev adrov, 
ovdémoTE GuapTdver WoTe KaTa Tov aKpiBH Adyov, 
eret07) Kal od axpiBodroyel, oddels THY Snuoupy@v 

@ Socrates always allows his interlocutors to amend their 
statements. Cf. Gorg. 491 B, 499 B, Protag. 349 c, Xen. Mem, 
iv. 2. 18. 

> Thrasymachus rejects the aid of an interpretation which 
Socrates would apply not only to the politician’s miscaleula- 
tions but to his total misapprehension of his true ideal 
interests, He resorts to the subtlety that the ruler gua ruler 
is infallible, which Socrates meets by the fair retort that the 
ruler gua ruler, the artist qua artist has no “sinister” or 
selfish interest but cares only for the work, If we are to 


as mM , SX x X; Kat yu : 

0 WV Ow ¥ 30424 : 

for his advantage. This was what theinferior had todo, 
and that this is the just was his position.”’ “‘ Thatisn’t 
what he said,” replied Polemarchus, ‘‘ Never mind, 
Polemarchus,” said I, “but if that is Thrasymachus’s 
present meaning, let us takeit from him?in that sense. 
“ XIV. So tell me, Thrasymachus, was this what 
you intended to say, that the just is the advantage 
of the superior as it appears to the superior whether 
it really is or not? Are we to say this was your 
meaning?” ‘Not in the least,” he said;® “do you 
suppose that I call one who is in error a superior when 
he errs?” “I certainly did suppose that you meant 
that,” I replied, “‘ when you agreed that rulers are 
not infallible but sometimes make mistakes.” ‘‘ That 
is because you argue like a pettifogger, Socrates, 
Why, to take the nearest example, do you call one 
who is mistaken about the sick a physician in respect 
of his mistake or one who goes wrong in a calculation 
a calculator when he goes wrong and in respect of 
this error? Yet that is what we say literally—we 
say that the physician‘ erred and the calculator and 
the schoolmaster. But the truth, I take it, is, that 
each of these in so far as he is that which we 
entitle him never errs; so that, speaking precisely, 
since you are such a stickler for precision,? no crafts- 

substitute an abstraction or an ideal for the concrete man 
we must do so consistently. Cf. modern debates about the 
“economic man.” 

¢ For the idea cf. Rousseau’s Emile, i,: On me dira... que 
les fantes sont du médecin, mais que la médicine en elle-méme 
est infaillible. A la bonne heure: mais qu’elle vienne donc sans 
le médecin.” Lucian, De Parasito 54,parodies this reasoning. 

* For the invidious associations of dxp:So\oyia (1) in money 
dealings, (2) in argument, cf. Aristot. Met. 995 a 11, Cratyi. 
415 a, Lysias vii. 12, Antiphon B 3, Demosth. xxiii. 148, 
Timon in Diog. Laert. ii. 19. 






dwapraver. emiAevrovans yap emLOTHULNS O dpap- 
Tavev dpapraver, ev @ obK €oTt Snpwoupyds wore 
Sypvoupyos 7 copes 7) dpxev oddels dpaprdver 
TOTE dray apywv Hs ain Tas ya av Elmo, OTL 6 
larpos ‘uapre Kat 6 dipyov Tapre. ToLovTov 
obv 67) gow Kal ee brroAaBe vov 2) drropivecban: 
To Se axpiBéorarov | excelvo Tvyxdver ov, TOV 
dpxovra., al? Ogov dipxev €or, fy) dpapraverv, 
a dapTavovra. de 70 adTo BéXrvorov TiBeoBar, 
tobro dé 7TH apxYowevw TmounTéov" wore, Orep e€ 
apxis Zdeyov, Sixavov Agyw 76 Tod Kpetrrovos 
mo.ety ovpdepov. 

XV. Elev, jv & eyes, ® Opactpaxe: boxe oou 
ovkoparreiv; Ilave pev obv, edn. Ole yap pe 
e& emBovdjjs ev Tots Adyous KaKkoupyobvrd Ge 
epeabat Os mpOmny 5 Eé pev obv olda, epy* Kal 
ovdev ye got mhéov € €orau oUTe yap av pe AdBots 
Kakoupy@v, ovre py) Aabas Bidcacbas TH Aoyw 
Svvaio. Ovsd y’ dy emuxeipyoayue, Vy 8 eyd. 
@ paxdpre. aA’ va pq) avbus jp Towodrov 
eyyernrat, Sudpioar, TOTEpws Aéyets TOV dpxovrd 
TE Kal TOV kpelrrova., TOV as émr0s etreiv ] TOV 
axprBet Ady, 6 ov’ viv 67) édeyes, ov {70 Evpdépov 
KpetTTovos ovtos Sikatov €oTar TH aTTOVe moveiy. 
Tov TO dxpiBearare, egy, Aoyw dpxovTa evra. 

mpos Tatra KaKovpyet Kal ouKO dvret, et TL 
Svvacat: ovdév gov maptieuat* GAN’ od py olds 7 

1 6y probable conjecture of Benedictus: mss. 6, 

@ Cf. 365 D. 
> i.e, the one who in vulgar parlance is so; ef, 7@ pjyare, 
340 pb. 



man errs. For it is when his knowledge abandons 
him that he who goes wrong goes wrong—when he 
is not a craftsman. So that no craftsman, wise man, 
or ruler makes a mistake then when he is a ruler, 
though everybody would use the expression that 
the physician made a mistake and the ruler erred. 
It is in this loose way of speaking, then, that you 
must take the answer I gave you a little while ago. 
But the most precise statement is that other, that 
the ruler in so far forth as ruler does not err, and not © 

ing he enacts what is best for himself, and this © 
the subject must do, so that, even as I meant from ~ 
the start, I say the just is to do what is for the 
advantage of the stronger.” 

XV. “So then, Thrasymachus,” said I, “my manner 
of argument seems to you pettifogging?”” “It does,” 
he said. “ You think, do you, that it was with 
malice aforethought and trying to get the better of 
you unfairly that I asked that question?” “I don't 
think it, I know it,” he said, “and you won’t make 
anything by it, for you won’t get the better of me 
by stealth and, failing stealth, you are not of the force? 
to beat me in debate.” “Bless your soul,” said I, 
“I wouldn’t even attempt such a thing. But that 
nothing of the sort may spring up between us again, 
define in which sense you take the ruler and stronger. 
Do you mean the so-called ruler” or that ruler in 
the precise sense of whom you were just now telling 
us, and for whose advantage as being the superior 
it will be just for the inferior to act?” “I mean 
the ruler in the very most precise sense of the word,” 
he said. “Now bring on against this your cavils 
and your shyster’s tricks if you are able. I ask 
no quarter. But you'll find yourself unable.” 



is. Ole yap av pe, elrov, obrw pavivat, dote 
upely emtxerpety Adovta Kal ovKxodavteiv Opacd- 
paxov; Niv yotv, én, emexeipnoas, ovdev av 
kat tadra. “Adny, qv 8° eyed, Trav TowwodTwv. ad’ 
elmé prow 6 TH axpiBet Adyw tatpds, dv aprtt 
EAeyes, méTEpov xpnuariaTis €oTw 7) TOV Kapvov- 
twv Oeparevtys; Kal Adye Tov TH Ovte iatpov 
ovra. Tav Kapvovtwy, bn, Oepamevrys. Ti dé 
KuBepyytns; 6 opbds KuBepyyitns vavTa@v apywv 
Deéoriv 4 vadtns; Navrdév dpywv. Oddev, oluat, 
tobto bmoAoyioréov, Gtt mAct ev TH vy, odd eort 
KAntéos vats: od yap Kata TO mAciv KUBepviTns 
KaAeirar, GAAd Kata tiv Téxvny Kal THY TOV 
vavta@v apxyjv. °*AdrnOA, én. Odxodv exdorw 
TovTwy cot. te Evdépov; Ilavy ye. Od Kat 
Téxyn, Hv 8 eyd, emi rodtw méduKev, emt T@ TO 
Euudépov exdotw Cnreiv te Kal exmopilew; “Ent 
tovTw, €fn. “Ap” odv Kal éxdotn THY TEexvav 
cote Te Evudepov dAdo 7 6 Te pddtora TeAcav 
Eelvat; as totro épwrds; “Qomep, ednv eyo, 

* A rare but obvious proverb. Cf. Schol. ad loc. and 
Aristides, Orat. Plat. ii. p. 143, 

> xai ratra=idque, normally precedes (cf. 404 c, 419 &, 
etc.). But Thrasymachus is angry and the whole phrase is 
short. Commentators on Aristoph. Wasps 1184, Frogs 704, 
and Acharn. 168 allow this position. See my note in A.J.P. 
vol. xvi. p. 234. Others: ‘ though you failed in that too.” 

¢ Cf. infra 541 8, Huthyphro 11 2, Charm. 153 p, ; 

4 Plato, like Herodotus and most idiomatic and elliptical 
writers, is content if his antecedents can be fairly inferred 
from the context. Cf. 330 ¢ rotro, 373 c, 396 B, 598 c 
texvav, Protag. 327 c. 

* Pater, Plato and Platonism, p. 242, fancifully cites this 
for “art for art’s sake.” See Zeller, p.605. Thrasymachus 



“Why, do you suppose,” I said, “ that I am so mad 
as to try to beard a lion? and try the pettifogger on 
Thrasymachus?" ‘ You did try it just now,” he 
said, “ paltry fellow though you be.”® “Something 
too much° of this sort of thing,” said I. “‘ But tell 
me, your physician in the precise sense of whom you 
were just now speaking, is he a moneymaker, an 
earner of fees, or a healer of the sick ? And remember 
to speak of the physician who is really such.” “A 
healer of the sick,” he replied. ‘‘ And what of the 
_ pilot—the pilot rightly so called—is he a ruler of 
sailors or a sailor? ’’ ‘‘ A ruler of sailors.” ‘ We 
don't, I fancy, have to take into account the fact that 
he actually sails in the ship, nor is he to be de- 
nominated a sailor. For it is not in respect of his 
sailing that he is called a pilot but in respect of his 
art and his ruling of the sailors.’ ‘‘ True,” he said. 
“ Then for each of them? is there not a something 
that is for his advantage?’’ ‘Quite so.” ‘And 
is it not also true,” said I, “ that the art naturally 
exists for this, to discover and provide for each his 
advantage?” “ Yes, for this.” ‘‘Is there, then, 
for each of the arts any other advantage than to be 

as perfect as possible*?”” “ What do you mean by | 

does not understand what is meant by saying that the art 
(=the artist qua artist) has no interest save the perfection 
of its (his) own function. Socrates explains that the bod 
by its very nature needs art to remedy its defects (Herod. 
i. 32, Tysis 217 8). But the nature of art is fulfilled in its 
service, and it has no other ends to be accomplished by 
another art and so on ad infinitum. It is idle to cavil and 
emend the text, because of the shift from the statement 
(341 p) that art has no interest save its perfection, to the 
statement that it needs nothing except to be itself (342 a-s). 
The art and the artist gua artist are ideals whose being by 
hypothesis is their perfection. 

59 | 



” ” > > a / tA “ 
el pre Epowo, et eEapKkel owmpare elvat owpare 7) 
A \ 
mpoodeiral Twos, elmo.” av OTe mavTdmac. ev 
A A \ 3 
odv mpoodeira. dia tadra Kal 1 Téxvyn €or 7 
~ ~ \ 
iatpixr) viv edpnuevn, ott o@pd €ore movnpov 
Kal odk e€apket adt@ TowvTw elvar. todT@ odv 
Smws exropiln Ta Evudépovta, emt TovT@ Tap- 
esxevdabn % Téxvn. 7 Opbds cor SoKd, Edny, 
”“ > a 4 ‘ad a“ ” > ~ ” 
dv eimeiy ottrw héywv, 7 00; "OpOds, edn. Ti 
Sé 84; adr} % latpixn éote trovnpd, 7) GAAQ Tis 
a ~ oe 
téxvn €08 6 tT mpoodetrai Twos apeTis, womep 
> » Tame \ > > a A A ~ Rp 
dpbadpoi dipews Kai Ata axons Kat dua, Tada €7 
adtois Set twos Téxvns THs TO Evpdépov eis Tabra* 
oxeouerns Te Kal eKrropiovons*; dpa Kat €Vv 
~ ~ a ¢ 
abth tH Téxvn Eve Tis movnpia, Kal Sel exaory 
réxvn adAns Téxvyns, yTIs adrH TO Evuddpov oKxe- 
petra, Kal TH oKoToUpern éTépas ad TovadTys, 
Kal Tobr éorw amépavtov; 7) abr?) adrH TO Evp- 

B dépov oxéerar; 7) odre abrijs odre aAdns mpoo- 

Setras emi tiv adtHs movnpiay to Evpdépov 
oKorretvy: UTE yap Tovnpia ovTe auaptia oddeuta 
ovdeuid Ttéxyvn mdpeoTw, odd€ mMpoojKer TEXVY 
” y y', atin Sa ¥ ed eS 
ddAAw 7d Evphépov Cyreiv 7} exeivw od TEXVH EOTY, 
> A A > \ ‘ > / / > > A s 
att? Sé aBAaPis Kal aKepaids eotw dpb) odaa, 
a an = € / > \ Vv 4 > / A 
éworep av % exdoTn axpiBiys An irEp €oTl; Kat 
a a ” 
oder exelvw TO axpiBet Adyw odTws 7 aAAws 
” 4 ” / 2 ” a > 
éxyet; Otrws, dn, daiverar. Ode dpa, qv 5 
éyd, latpixt) larpux® to évpdépov oKomet adda 
/ / ” ? \ ¢ \ ec a > > 
odpartt. Nat, bn. Ovddsé tray tmmucg add 
oe i) \ » / > / ¢ lo 2O. 
immouss ovde aAAn réxvn oddcuia eavTH, ovdE 

1 A. M. Burnet improbably reads airé raidra with FD, 
2 The future (q) is better than the present (Al/Z). 



that question?” “‘ Just as if,” I said, ‘“ you should 
ask me whether it is enough for the body to be the 
body or whether it stands in need of something else, 
I would reply, “‘ By all means it stands in need. 
That is the reason why the art of medicine has now 
been invented, because the body is defective and 
such defect is unsatisfactory. To provide for this, 
then, what is advantageous, that is the end for which 
the art was devised.’ Do you think that would be 
a correct answer, or not?” “Correct,” he said. 
“But how about this? Is the medical art itself 
_ defective or faulty, or has any other art any need of 
some virtue, quality, or excellence—as the eyes of 
vision, the ears of hearing, and for this reason is 
there need of some art over them that will consider 
and provide what is advantageous for these very 
ends—does there exist in the art itself some defect 
and does each art require another art to consider its 
advantage and is there need of still another for the 
considering art and so on ad infinitum, or will the art 
look out for its own advantage? Or is it a fact that 
it needs neither itself nor another art to consider its 
advantage and provide against its deficiency? For 
there is no defect or error at all that dwells in any 
art. Nor does it befit an art to seek the advantage 
of anything else than that of its object. But the art 
itself is free from all harm and admixture of evil, and 
is right so long as each art is precisely and entirely 
that which it is. And consider the matter in that 
* precise ’ way of speaking. Is itso or not?” “It 
appears to be so,” he said. “‘ Then medicine,” said I, 
“ does not consider the advantage of medicine but of 
the body?” “Yes.” ‘‘ Nor horsemanship of horse- 
manship but of horses, nor does any other art look out 



yap mpoodeirar, GAN éxeivw ob swexvn €otiv. 
Paiverar, ey, odrws. "AMA pay, aj Opacvpaxe, 
dpxovat ye ai Téyvar Kal Kpatotow éxelvov, 0 obmép 
etou TEXVAL. Luvexspyoev evraba Kal pada boys. 
Odx dpa enor HL ye ovdeuia TO TOD KpetTTovos 
Evppépov oKomet ov8" emutdrret, aNd. To Tob 
WTTOVOs TE Kat dipxoprevov b70 éaurijs. up- 
wporoynce pev Kal tadra TeAevT@v, emexeiper Sé 
TeEpt aura pdxeobau’ émevd1) d¢ Rie. bs 
“AMo Tt obv, iy 8 éywd, ob5€ larpos ovdeis, ka? @ 
daov tarpos, TO TO latTp@ Evpdepov oxoTet OVO 
emurdrret, GAAa TO TO Kd pvovTe ; ; cond ToL OF 
yap 6 dcpiBys ¢ tarpos owpdroov elvar dpywv aan” 
od Xpnpwarioris. nH ody Gporoynrar ; Euvégy. 
Odxodv Kal 6 xuBepynirns 6 axpiBis vavTav elvau 

EG@ dipxcov aAN’ od vadrns; ‘Quodrdsynrac. Ov« dpa. 
6 ye Towtros KuBepyryrns Te Kal dpyov To TO 
KuBepvirn Evupdepov oxeperat Te Kal mpoordéet, 

Aa TO TO vavrn TE Kat dpropevy. Huvédnoe 
poyis. Odxoby, hv 8 eyo, ® Opacvpaxe, ove” 
dMos ovdels ev ovdeud apyn, Kal? daov dpxwv 
€otl, TO adt@ Evudéepov okomet ovd emirate, 
GAAA TO TH Gpxyopevw Kal @ av adbros Snuoupyy, 
kal mpdos exetvo BAémwy Kal To éxeivw Evudépov 
Kal mpémov, Kal Aéyer & A€yer Kal moved a moet 

343) XVI. ’Ezeid1) obv evraila juev tod Adyou Kat 

@ The next step is the identification of (true) polities with 
the disinterested arts which also rule and are the stronger. 
Cf. Xen. Mem. iii. 9.11. ye emphasizes the argumentative 
implication of dpxovc. to which Thrasymachus assents 
reluctantly ; and Socrates develops and repeats the thought 



for itself—for it has no need—but for that of which 
it is the art.” ‘‘So it seems,” he replied. ‘ But 
surely,* Thrasymachus, the arts do hold rule and are 
than that of which they are the arts.” He 
conceded this but it went very hard. * no 
” the adv. mger 
but-every-art that of the weaker-whieh is ruled by it.” 
‘This too he was finally brought to admit though he © 
tried to contest it. But when he had agreed—* Can we 
deny, then,” said I, “ that neither does any physician ; 
in so far as he is a physician seek or enjoin the 
advantage of the physician but that of the patient ? 
For we have agreed that the physician, “precisely ’ 
speaking, is a ruler and governor of bodies and not 
a money-maker. Did we agree on that?” He 
assented. “And so the ‘precise’ pilot is a ruler of 
sailors, not a sailor? ”” That was admitted. “ Then 
that sort of a pilot and ruler will not consider and 
enjoin the advantage of the pilot but that of the sailor 
whose ruler he is.” He assented reluctantly. “Then,” 
said I, “ Thrasymachus, neither does anyone in any 
office-of rule in-so-far as-he-i is~a-ruler.consider =" 
enjoin his own advantage but that of. 
for whom he cit came Ni oialt- oak lie 
is-eyes fixed on that and on what is advan- 
tageous and suitable to that in-allthat he says and 

XVI. When we had come to this point in the dis- 

for half a . Art is virtually science, as contrasted with 
empiric of thumb, and Thrasymachus’s infallible rulers 
are of course scientific. “* Ruler is added lest we forget the 
analogy between political rule and that of the arts. Cf. 
Newman, Introd. A tistot. Pol. 244, Laws 875 c. 

® It is not content with theoretic knowledge, but like other 
arts gives orders to achieve results. Cf. Politicus 260 a, c. 



~ ~ , > 
mao. Katapaves Hv, dtt 6 TOD SiKaiov Adyos «Ets 
> \ lot 
Tovvarriov meprecaTnKel, 6 Opacdpayos avTi Tob 
> Ud 6 E s yy Lg ¥ / , TO 
aroxpivecbar, Eimé por, edn, & LadKpates, titOy 
co. €orw; Ti dé; Hv 8 éeyd- ode dmoxpivecbat 
A a an ~ > a @ , »” 
xpiv wadAov 7) Towabra epwrav; “Or Toi ce, Edn, 
a a / 
Kopul@vra mepiopa Kal ovK amopuvrrer Sedpevov, 
Os ye ath ovde mpdBata ovd€ Tompeva yuyvwoKets. 
” \ 
“Ore 5) ti pddvora; Fv 8 eyes “Ore ote tods 
~ na \ 
B wowpévas 7 tods Bouxddovs 76 TOV mpoBdtwv 7 TO 
~ ~ a A 
Tt&v Body ayalov oxoneivy Kal maxydvew adtods 
\ ~ 
kai Oepamevew mpdos dAdo tu Br€rovtas 7 TO TOV 
~ ~ ‘ ‘ 
SeomoTa@y ayabov Kal TO adt@v- Kal 81) Kal Tovs 
> Aa , »” a e > ~ »” 
ev Tats 7dAcow apyovTas, ot ws aAnfas dpxovow, 
GdAws ws Ayet Suavocicfar mpds Tods apyomevous 
bal o ” ‘ / / y at 
 Worep av tis mpos mpdBata diarebein, Kai dAdo 
Tt oxoTrety abtovs dia vuKTOS Kal Huepas 7 TOTO 
4 > \ > / \ 4 / , 
C o8ev adroit ddheAjoovrat. Kal odtw moppw et rept 

* Thrasymachus first vents his irritation by calling 
Socrates a snivelling innocent, and then, like P: oras 
(Protag. 334), when pressed by Socrates’ dialectic makes a 
speech. He abandons the abstract (ideal) ruler, whom he 
assumed to be infallible and Socrates proved to be dis- 
interested, for the actual ruler or shepherd of the people, 
who tends the flock only that he may sete it. All political 
experience and the career of successful tyrants, whom all 
men count happy, he thinks confirms this view, which is 
that of Callicles in the Gorgias. Justice is another’s good 
which only the naive and “innocent” pursue. It is better 
to inflict than to suffer wrong. The main problem of the 
Republic is clearly indicated, but we are not yet ready to 
debate it seriously. 

> xopufavra L. & S., also s.v. xdpuga. Lucian, Lexiphanes 
18, treats the expression as an affectation, but elsewhere 
employs it. The philosophers used this and similar terms 


ee ae = ll? ee 


cussion and it was apparent to everybody that his 
formula of justice had suffered a reversal of form, 
Thrasymachus, instead of replying,* said, “ Tell me, 
Socrates, have you got a nurse? >” “What do you 
mean?” said I. “Why didn’t you answer me 
instead of asking such a question ? ” “ Because,” he 
said, “she lets her little ‘ snotty’ run about drivel- 
> and doesn’t wipe your face clean, though you 
need it badly, if she can’t get you to know® the 
difference between the shepherd and the sheep.” 
“And what, pray, makes you think that?” 
said I. ‘‘ Because you think that the shepherds 
and the neat-herds are considering the good of 
the sheep and the cattle and fatten and tend 
them with anything else in view than the good of 
their masters and themselves ; and by the same token 
you seem to suppose that the rulers in. our cities, I 
mean the real rulers,’ differ at all in their thoughts 
of the governed from a man’s attitude towards his 
sheep @ or that they think of anything else night and 
day than the sources of their own profit. And you 
fee San 4 , (2) as a type of the minor ills of the flesh. 
. ii, 2. 76, Epictet. i. 6. 30 adr’ ai pvtac 
Tite “if you don’t know for her.” For the ethical 
dative pean ally, if Taming of the Shrew, t. ii. 8 “* Knock me 
here soundly.” Not to know the shepherd from the sheep 
seems to be proverbial. ‘Shepherd of the people,” like 
_ “survival of the fittest,” may be used to prove anything in 
ethics and politics. Cf. Newman, Introd. Aristot. Pol. p. 
431, Xen. Mem. iii. 2. 1, Sueton. Vit. Tib. 32, and my note 
in Class. Phil. vol. i. p. "308. 
achus’s real rulers are the bosses and tyrants. 
., true rulers are the true kings of the Stoics and 
Ruskin, the true shepherds of Ruskin and Milton. 
* Cf. Aristoph. Clouds 1203 ™popar’ &\Aws, Herrick, ao ewi cg 
ought to shear, not skin their sheep.” 

VOL. I _F 65 


te Tod Sixaiov Kali Sixavoovvyns Kal adikov Te Kal 
ddikias, WoTe ayvoeis, STL 7 pev SiKatoovyyn Kal Td 
dixavov aAAdtpiov ayablov TH OvT, TOD KpettToves 
Te Kal apxovros ~vpdépov, oixeia S€ tod mreHo- 
piéevov te Kal danperodvtos BAdByn, 7 Se adiKia 
Tovvartiov, Kat dpye. TOV ws aAnbads edyOixadv re 
Kat dukaiwy, ot d apxopevot rowotcr TO ékelvou 
Evudépov Kpeittovos ovtos, Kal eddaimova eKeivov 
D zowotcw danpetodvtes adT@, éavtods Se ovd 
omwotiobv. oKoteicba S€, @ edybéorate Lw- 
Kpates, ovtwot yp, OTe Sixatos arvjp adiKov 
mavtaxod €Aatrov €xer. mp@rov pev ev Tois mpos 
GAAnAovs EvpBodAaiows, mov av 6 TowbiTos TH 
ToLovTm KOWwVHon, ovdayod av Evpois Ev TH 
Suadvce: Tis Kowwvias tAdov Exovra Tov SixaLov 
Tob adixov add’ édatrov: Exevta ev Tos mpos THY 
moAw, Otav Té TWEs elohopai Wow, 6 ev Sikatos 
amo T@v lowv mAéov ciodeper, 6 8 EdaTTOV, Tay 
E re Anipers, 6 ev oddev, 6 5€ 7oAAG Kepdaiver. Kal 
yap OTav apyyv twa apxn ێkatepos, TH ev 

* This (quite possible) sense rather than the ironical, *‘so 
far advanced,”’ better accords with dyvoets and with the direct 
brutality of Thrasymachus. 

> +G dvr like ws dAnOGs, drexvas, etc., marks the application 
(often ironical or emphatic) of an image or familiar pro- 
verbial or technical expression or etymology. Cf. 443 p, 
442 a, 419 a, 432 a, Laches 187 8, Phileb. 645. Similarly 
érjtunov of a proverb, Archil. fr. 35 (87). The origin of the 
usage appears in Aristoph. Birds 507 ror’ Gp’ éxew’ jv robmos 
a\nOas, etc. Cf. Anth. Pal. v. 6.3. With evn@:xav, however, 
ws ddnOas does not verify the etymology but ironically 
emphasizes the contradiction between the etymology and 
the conventional meaning, ‘‘ simple,” which Thrasymachus 
thinks truly fits those to whom Socrates would apply the 
full etymological meaning “‘ of good character.” Cf. 348 c, 



ra’ WA Hidag : + 4 im 2 > / / 

: “Pe 
} TT HE 

are so far out* concerning the just and justice and 
the unjust and injustice that you don’t know that 
justice and the just are literally the other fellow’s 
oy ¢_the advantage of the stronger and the ruler, 
t a detriment that is all his own of the subject 
who obeys and serves ; while injustice is the contrary 
and rules those who are simple in every sense of the 
word and just, and they being thus ruled do what is 
for his advantage who is the stronger and make him 
happy by serving him, but themselves by no manner 
of means. And you must look at the matter, my 
simple-minded Socrates, in this way : that the just © 
man always comes out at a disadvantage in_his 
relation. withthe. unjust...To begin with, in-their 
business dealings in any joint undertaking of the © 
-will never find that the just man-has the 
advantage over the unjust at the dissolution of the 
partnership~but-that he always has the worst of it. 
Then again, in their relations with the state, if there 
are direct taxes or contributions to be paid, the just 
man contributes more from an equal estate and the 
other less, and when there is a distribution the one 
gains much and the other nothing. And so when 
each holds office, apart from any other loss the just 

400 ©, Laws 679 c, Thucyd. iii. 83. Cf. in English the con- 
nexion of “silly” with selig, and in Italian, Leopardi’s 
bitter comment on dabbenaggine (Pensieri xxvi.). 

¢ Justice not being primarily a self-regarding virtue, like 
prudence, is of course another’s good. Cf. Aristot. Eth. Nic. 
1130a3; 1134b5. Thrasymachus ironically accepts the 
formula, adding the cynical or pessimistic comment, “but 
one’s own harm,” for which see 392 8, Eurip. Heracleid. 1-5, 
and Isocrates’ protest (viii. 32). Bion Diog. Laert. iv. 7. 48) 
wittily defined beauty as “‘ the other fellow’s good”; which 
recalls Woodrow Wilson’s favourite limerick, and the 
definition of business as “ l’argent des autres.” 

ra ee iP. ie a 
AY t : 

(y ey VuU\Lin : 



} , e wy ‘ > b f if , 
iKalw vrapxet, Kal ef pndeuia GAAn Cypia, Ta ye 
> a > > / / ” > i “a 
oixeta bu’ apéAccav pwoxOnporépws exew, ex S€ Tob 
/ A > a A \ / J 
Synpociov pndev wdercicbar dia To Sixaiov elvar, 
mpos 5€ tovTois améxOeo8at Tois TE oiKketois Kal 
Tots yrwpipois, GTav pndev €0An adrois banpereiv 
Tapa TO Sdikaov: T@ S€ ddikw mdvTa TovTwY 
> 'g c , A , ‘ o ~ \ » ‘ 
tavavtia dmdpxer. A€yw yap ovrep vov 8) Edeyor, 
344 Tov peydda Svuvdpevov tAcoverteiv. todrov obv 
oxorret, etrep BovAer Kpivew, Gow pwaddAov Evudéeper 
idia avt@ ddixov elvac 7 TO Sixavov. mavrwv de 
tn ae 2\ hs \ , 2 , 
pdora pabrjoe, eav emt thy TeAewrdTny adikiay 
é\Ons, 7) TOV pev adiKyjoavta eddaysoveoTaTov 
mot, Tovs dé adinbevtas Kal ddikfoar ovK av 
Lye i0A / ” 8é fol 7, 
eOédovras ab\wrdrouvs. €att S€ Todto Tupavvis, 
a > ‘ \ > ld ‘ / \ / 
9.00 KaTad optKpoy taAAoTpia Kal Adbpa Kai Bia 
adapeirar, Kal fepa Kal doa Kal tdva Kal Snpoo.a, 
> ‘ / 2 e 24? ¢ / / a 
B dAda EvdAAnfdnv- dv ed’ Exdorm peper Stay Tis 
> / \ 10 ~ / V<—3% id 4 ‘ 
aducnoas 1) AdOn, Cyprobrai te Kal dveldn exer TA 
péytora: Kal yap tepdovAot Kal dvdpamrodvoral 
Kal Towxwpvxou Kal amoorepyTal Kat KAémTar ot 
KaTa pepn adiKodvTes THY ToLovTwWY KaKoUpyn- 
pdtwr Kadobvrat: érevdav Sé€ tis mpos Tots TaV . 
moATOv xpypwact Kal adrods avdpamoducdpevos 
SovAdontat, avTt TovTwy TOV aicyp@v dvopwatwv 

* For the idea that the just ruler neglects his own business 
and gains no compensating “ graft” ef. the story of Deioces 
in Herod. i. 97, Democ, fr. 253 Diels, Laches 180 3, Isoc. 
xii. 145, Aristot. Pol. v, 8. 15-20, For office as a means of 
helping friends and harming enemies ef. Meno 71 8, Lysias 
ix. 14, and the anecdote of Themistocles (Plutarch, Praecept. 


vaca\ : ae DUECCEMI4An\ 5 
a A Va a) \ 40a ' Pe 

UW : 

man must count on his own affairs falling into dis- 
order through neglect, while because of his justice 
he makes no profit from the state, and thereto he will 
displease his friends and his acquaintances by his 
unwillingness to serve them unjustly. But to the 
unjust man all the opposite advantages accrue. I 
mean, of course, the one I was just speaking of, the 
man who has the ability to overreach on a large scale. 
Consider this type of man, then, if you wish to judge 
how much more profitable it is to him personally to 
be unjust than to be just. And the easiest way of 
all to understand this matter will be to turn to the 
most consummate form of injustice which makes the 
man who has done the wrong most happy and those 
who are wronged and who would not themselves will- 
ingly do wrong most miserable. And this is tyranny, 
which both-by stealth and by force takes away What 
belongs to others, both sacred and profane, both 
private and public, not little by little but at one 
swoop.’ For each several part of such wrongdoing 
the malefactor who fails to escape detection is fined 
and incurs the extreme of contumely ; for temple- 
robbers, kidnappers, burglars, swindlers, and thieves 
are the appellations of those who commit these 
several forms of injustice. But when in addition to 
the property of the citizens men kidnap and enslave 
the citizens themselves, instead of these opprobrious 

reipub. ger. 13) cited by Godwin (Political Justice) in the 
form: ‘God forbid that I should sit upon a bench of justice 
where my friends found no more favour than my enemies.” 
Democr. (fr. 266 Diels) adds that the just ruler on laying 
down his office is exposed to the revenge of wrongdoers wi 
whom he has dealt severely. 

» The order of words dramatically expresses Thrasy- 
machus’s excitement and the sweeping success of the tyrant. 



evdaipoves kat jaxdproe KécAnvrat, od pdvov bmr6 
C rév Today aNd, kat 70 Tov aAAwv, Soot dv 
mUbwvrat avrov Thy OAnv dbuctay 7ducnKora” od 
yap TO Tovey Ta douKca adda TO mdoxew poBovpe- 
vou overdilovaw ot oveilovres Th dductay. ovTws, 
7) Uaxpares, Kal loyupdtepov Kal eAcvepusre- 
pov Kal SeomroTiKusTepov dducia Sucauoovvns éorly 
ixavas yeyvonern, Kal O7ep ef a apxiis éXeyov, TO Lev 
Tob KpetTTovos Evpdepov TO dSikaov Tuyxdvet ov, 
To 8 dduKov éavT@ Avavredoby Te Kal Svudépov. 
D XVII. Tadra el7wv 6 Opacipaxos ev v@ elxev 
dmvéva, womep Badaveds % Hav karavrAjoas Kara 
Trav orev dOpdov Kal mohbv TOV Adyov. od pen 
elacdv ye avrov oi Tapovres, dN’ edyKacay 
drropetvat TE Kal mapacxelv Tév elpnwevwv Adyovs 
Kal 5) €ywye Kal adros mavu ededunv Te Kal elmov 
*Q Satpdre Opacvpaxe, olov euBadev Adyov ev 
v@ €xets amvévat, mplv diddEa ixavas 7} pabeiv 
cite oUTws «ite GAAws exer; 7 OpLuKpov oleu €7- 
E xetpelv mpdypya Suopilecbar, dAX’ ov Biov Siaywyiy, 
Hh av Suayopevos ExaorTos av Avovredcorarny 
Cony lan; "Eye yap olua, en 6 Opacdpaxos, 
Toutl addAws éxew; “Eouxas, Hv eyo, TOL 
nHpav ye oddev K7deobar, oddé te dpovrilew cite 

* The European estimate of Louis Napoleon before 1870 
is a good illustration. Cf. Theopompus on Philip, Polybius 
viii. 11. Euripides’ Bellerophon (fr. 288) uses the happiness 
of the tyrant as an argument against the moral government 
of the world. 

> Aristot. Hth, Nic. 1130b15 uses the expression in a 
different sense. 

¢ The main issue of the Republic. Cf. 360 p, 358 £ and 
Gorg. 469 B. 
¢ Cf. Theophrastus, Char. xv. 19 (Jebb), Tucker, Life in 


names they are pronounced happy and blessed * not 
only by their fellow-citizens but by all who hear the 
story of the man who has committed complete and 
ws injustice.? For it is not the fear of doing ° but 

ae shi revile injustice, Thus, Socrates, injustice 
on a sufficiently large scale is a stronger, freer, and 

more masterful thing than justice, and, as I said in | 

the beginning, it is the advantage of the stronger 
that is the just, while the unjust is what profits a 
man’s self and is for his advantage.” 

XVII. After this Thrasymachus was minded to 
depart when like a bathman? he had poured his speech 
in a sudden flood over our ears. But the company 
would not suffer him and were insistent that he should 
remain and render an account of what he had said. 
And I was particularly urgent and said, “ I am sur- 
prised at you, Thrasymachus ; after hurling * such a 
doctrine at us, can it be that you propose to depart 
without staying to teach us properly or learn your- 
self whether this thing is so or not? Do you think 
it is asmall matter’ that you are attempting to deter- 
mine and not the entire conduct of life that for each 
of us would make living most worth while?’ “* Well, 
do I deny it?%”’ said Thrasymachus. “ You seem to,” 
said I, “ or else” to care nothing for us and so feel no 
Ancient Athens, acm For the metaphor ef. 536 8, Lysis 
204 p, Aristoph. 3 483. *‘* Sudden,” lit. * all at once.” 

* Cf. Eurip. “Alcestis 680 ob Badd oitrws det. 

? Socrates reminds us that a serious moral issue is involved. 
in all this word-play. So 352 p, Gorg. 492 c, 500 c, Laches 
1854. Cf. infra 377 B, 578 c, 608 B. 

# Plainly a protesting question, ‘‘ Why, do I think other- 
wise?” Cf. su supra 339 p 

*® For the impossibility of J. and C.’s “or rather” see my 
note in A.J.P. vol. xiii. p. 234. 



“wrong that calls-forth the. reproaches of | 


pe le , , > md pee ‘: 
xelpov cite BeAtiov Biwodpeba ayvoodvtes O ov 
dis <idévar. GAN, & yale, mpoOvpod Kat nyiv 
345 evdeiEac0ar: ovror KaK@s oot Keloerat, 6 TL av 
Huds tocovade dvras evdepyeTHons. eyo yap 87 
cou Aéyw 7d y’ eudv, Ste od mreopat od olwac 
ddixiav Sixaoodvns Kepdadewtepov elvat, odd’ €av 
€G tis adriv Kat 7) SakwAvn mparrew & BovAerau: 
GN’, & *yabé, éo7Tw puev ddikos, Svvdcbw de 

> ~ ” a“ / nn a 4, a 
aducety 7) T@ AavOdvew 7 TH StapdyecOar, ows 

> ~ 

ene ye ov meter ws cote THs Sixaoodvyns Kepda- 
B Aewrepov. tair otv Kal €repos tows tis Nav 
ménovlev, od povos €yw. mTEicov odv, @ pakdpte, 
ixav@s Huds, te odk dpP@s BovAevopeba Sucato- 
avvnv adiKias ept 7AEiovos movovpevor. Kai mas, 
ébn, o€ melow; et yap ols viv d) eAeyov pn TeE- 
Tevoal, TL Got ETt TOLNowW; 7) eis THY uxnVv dépwv 

> ~ 4 /, ‘ np > > 4 A 4 
€v0H tov royov; Ma AV, jv & eyw, pn av ye 
> 4 a , a ” D4 ‘ Riise a 
aA Gd mpdrov pv, & av etmys, Eupeve Tovrors. 7 
éav petatiO7, havep@s peratibeco Kat nuads pH 
C ééardra. viv 8€ opds, @ Opactmaxe, ere yap 

\ ” > / a \ ¢€ > ~ 

Ta €umpoober emioxesapcba, te TOV ws aAnbas 
iarpov. 76. mp@tov dpilouevos Tov ws aAnP@s zot- 

@ xelcerat of an investment perhaps. Cf. Plautus, Rudens 
939 ** bonis quod bene fit, haud perit.” 

» Isocrates viii. $31 and elsewhere seems to be copying 
Plato’s idea that injustice can never be profitable in the higher 
sense of the word. Cf. also the proof in the Hipparchus that 
all true xépdos is dyaér. 

¢ Plato neglects for the present the refinement that the 
unjust man does not do what he really wishes, since all 
desire the good. Cf. infra 438 a, 577 pv, and Gorg. 467 B. 

* Of. 365 v. : 10 a 
¢ Thrasymachus has stated his doctrine. Like Dr, Johnson: 


eee lL 
— ay VA cavy \eO DA 


concern whether we are going to live worse or better 
lives in our ignorance of what you affirm that you 
know. Nay, my good fellow, do your best to make 
the matter clear to us also: it will be no bad invest- 
ment? for you—any benefit that you bestow on such 
a company as this. For I tell you for my part that 
I am not convinced, neither do I think that injustice 
is more profitable ° than justice, not even if one gives 
it free scope and does not hinder it of its will.° But, 
suppose, sir, a man to be unjust and to be able to 
act unjustly either because he is not detected or can 
maintain it by violence,* all the same he does not 
convince me that it is more profitable than justice. 
Now it may be that there is.someone else among us 
who feels in this way and that I am not the only one. 
Persuade us, then, my dear fellow, convince us satis- 
factorily that we are ill advised in preferring justice 
to injustice.” “‘ And how am I to persuade you?’’* 
he said. “If you are not convinced by what I just 
now was saying, what more can I do for you? Shall 
I take the argument and ram/ it into your head?” 
“Heaven forbid!” I said, “‘ don’t do that. But in 
the first place when you have said a thing stand by 
it,? or if you shift your ground change openly and 
don’t try to deceive us. But, as it is, you see, 
Thrasymachus—let us return to the previous ex- 
amples—you see that while you began by taking the 
physician in the true sense of the word, you did not 

he cannot supply brains to understand it. Cf. Gorg. 489 c, 
4998, Meno75v. 

? The language is idiomatic, and the metaphor of a nurse 
feeding a baby, Aristoph. Eccl. 716, is rude. Cf. Shakespeare, 
“He crams these words into my ears against the stomach of 
my sense.”’ 

-#. Of. Socrates’ complaint of Callicles’ shifts, Gorg. 499 B-c, 
but cf. supra 334 x, 340 B-c. : 


peva odKéTe ov Seiv Borepov axpiPds vada, 
GAAG Tropatvew' ole. adtov Ta TmpdBata, Kal’ Scov 
Tolny €oTW, o0 mpos TO TOV mpoBarwv BédrvaTov 
BAérovra, GAN’ womep Sartypova twa Kal péA- 
Aovra éoridcecbar mpds THY edwyxlav, 7) ad mpos 
Dro drodécba, dorep xpnuatiotny aAX’ od Trot- 
péva. TH dé mousercKH od Symov aAAov Tov péAe 
” > 
7, eb @ Téraxtar, Omws tTov’Tw Td PéATLoTOV 
exmropiet* eel Ta ye adThs, war elvar BeAtiorn, 
ixav@s Siymov éxmendptotar, ws y av pxdev 
évdén Tod rroeviKi elvar’ otrw Sé w@ynv eywye 
viv &) dvayKaiov eclvar jyiv opodoyeiv, macav 
> / > @ > tA \ » \ A 
apxjv, Kal’ doov apxy, undevt dAAw 7d BéATioTOr 
oxoTretabar 7) exeivw TH apyowevw te Kal Oepa- 
E zevopévw, &v re ToditiuKH Kal iSuwtiKh apyh. ov 
S€ rods dpxovras év tats mdAeor, Tovs adAnOds 
»” ¢ / wv »” A ” ” ” 
dpxovras, éxdvras oler dpyew; Ma A’ odk, €dn, 
aad’ <b olda. 
XVIII. Ti 8€; Fv 8 evs, & Opacdpaxe, tas 
” > A > > - Li e) ‘ 27 LA 
GAAas apyas ovK evvoeis att ovdels Cedar apyew 
¢ 4 > A ‘ ] ~ e + Page. | > a 
éexwv, GAAa pobdov aitodow, ws ovxt avTotow 
> / > / > ~ > A ~ > 
whéArcvav eooevynv ex Tob dpxew adda Tots apxo- 
346 evois; e€mel Toadvde eimé: odxL ExdOTHY pEVTOL 
apev éxdotote Tav Texvav TodTw éTépay elvat, 
1 roimalvew (4 yp in marg. A*)] meatvew (A) om seem to 
fit da:ruudva better but does not accord so well with xaé’ 
8cov, etc. For the thought ¢f. Dio Chrys. Or, i. 48 R., 
who virtually quotes, adding ws é¢n ris. 


¢ The art=the ideal abstract artist. See on 342 a-c. 
Aristot. Eth. Nic. 1098 a8 ff. says that the function of a 
harper and that of a good harper are generically the same. 
Cf. Crito 48 a. 



think fit afterwards to be consistent and maintain 
with precision the notion of the true shepherd, but 
you apparently think that he herds his sheep in his 
quality of shepherd, not with regard to what is best 
for the sheep, but as if he were a banqueter about to 
be feasted with regard to the good cheer or again 
with a view to the sale of them, as if he were a 
money-maker and not a shepherd. But the art of 
the shepherd? surely is concerned with nothing else 
than how to provide what is best for that over which 
it is set, since its own affairs, its own best estate, are 
surely sufficiently provided for so long as it in nowise 
fails of being the shepherd’s art. And in like manner 
I supposed that we just now were constrained to 
acknowledge that every form of rule ® in so far as it 
is rule considers what is best for nothing else than 
that which is governed and cared for by it, alike in 
political and private rule. Why, do you think that 
the rulers and holders of office in our cities—the 
true_rulers ‘—willingly hold office and rule?” “I 
don’t think,” he said, “ I know right well they do.” 
XVIII. “ But what of other forms of rule, Thrasy- 
machus? Do you not perceive that no one chooses of 
his own will to hold the office of rule, but they demand 
pay, which implies that not to them will benefit accrue 
from their holding office but to those whom they 
rule? For tell me this: we ordinarily say, do we 
not, that each of the arts is different from others 

» Aristotle’s despotic rule over slaves would seem to be 
an exception (Newman, Introd. Aristot. Pol. p. 245). But 
that too should be for the good of the slave; infra 590 pb. 

© See on 348 z, Aristot. Hth. Nic. 1102 a8. e new point 
that good rulers are reluctant to take office is discussed to 
347 e, and recalled later, 520 p. See Newman, l.c. pp. 244- 
245, Dio Cass, xxxvi. 27. 1. 



TO érépay THY, Sivapuy €, Exel; Kal, é paxdpre, 1) 
Tapa. ddgav dzroxpivou, iva Te Kal Tepaivanev. 
"Aa todtw, Edn, érépa. OdKodv Kai wpédcvav 
éxdorn ‘Stay Twa npiv mapexeTat, GAd” od Kownp, 
olov é larpucr) [ev dylevay, Kvupepyyntucn dé owrnptay 
ev T@ meiv, Kat at at ovTws ; avu ih 
Odxoov Kat proberucy puobov; airy yap av 
By Svvapus: THY latpucny ob Kal THY reBeponyruey 
TV avrhy Kadeis; 7 édavmep BovdAn axpBéis 
Scopilew, aorep dréBou, ovdev Tt paArov, edv Tes 
KuBepyav dyuns ylynrae dua To Evudepew adT@ 
mew € ev TH 0. dtT™, «veka TovTOV Kahets pGAdAov 
adriy larpuxnp ; Od dita, é¢n. Ovde y’, oljwar, 
Thy pucbwriKyy, éav dyvaivy Tis puobaprarv. 
Cdijra. Ti 8€; tiv latpixny peocbaprntixyy, éav 
iwpevos Tis probapr7 ; Ov, é¢n. Odxoty rHv 
ye whédAcav éxdorns Ths TEXVNS iiav copohoyn- 
capev elvar; “Eorw, dn. “Hytwa 4, apa wpércvav 
Kow}} wgedobvrat mavres ot Snpwoupyot, _ dijov 
Ott Kowh Twi TO abt@ mpocypwpevor am’ éxetvou 
adedobyrat. "Eouxev, edn. Paper dé. ye TO 
prabov _dpvupévous wgedetobae TOUS Snypwoupyods 
amo Tob mpooxphaba TH pobwrixh EXD yiyve- 
ofa. adrois. Suvédn poyis. Ovx dpa amo Tihs 
* Cf. Gorg. 495 a. But elsewhere Socrates admits that 
the “argument” may be discussed regardless of the belief 
of the respondent (349 a). Cf. Thompson on Meno 83 pv, 
Campbell on Soph. 246 pv. 
® As each art has a specific function, so it renders a specific 
service and aims at a specific good. This idea and the 
examples of the physician and the pilot are commonplaces 
in Plato and Aristotle. 

- © Hence, as argued below, from this abstract point of 
view wage-earning, which is common to many arts, cannot 


because’ its power or function is different? And, 
my dear fellow, in order that we may reach some 
result, don’t answer counter to your real belief.*” 
“Well, yes,” he said, “that is what renders it 
different.” ‘‘ And does not each art also yield us 
benefit ° that is peculiar to itself and not general,’ as 
for example medicine health, the pilot’s art safety 
at sea, and the other arts similarly ? ?”  “ Assuredly. 
“And does not the wage-earner’s art yield wage? 
For that is its function. Would you identify medicine 
and the pilot’ sart? Or if you please to discriminate 
ly ’ as you proposed, none the more if a pilot 
his health because a sea voyage is good for 
re no whit the more, I say, for this reason do 
you call his art medicine, do you?” “ Of course 
not,” he said. “ Neither, I take it, do you call wage- 
earning medicine if a man earning wages is in 
health.” “Surely not.” “ But what of this? Do you 
call medicine wage-earning, if a man when giving 
treatment earns wages?” “ No,” he said. “ And did 
we not agree that the benefit derived from each art is 
peculiar toit?” “So be it.” hesaid. “Any common 
or general benefit that all craftsmen receive, then, 
they obviously derive from their common use of some 
further identical thing.” ‘It seems so,” he said. 
“And we say that the benefit of earning wages 
accrues to the craftsmen from their further exercise 
of the wage-earning art.” He assented reluctantly 

be the specific service of any of them, but must pertain to 
the special art ~:cfwrixy. ‘This refinement is justified by 
achus’s original abstraction of the infallible crafts- 
man as such. It has also this much moral truth, that the 
good workman, as Ruskin says, rarely thinks first of his 
pay, and that the knack of getting well paid does not 
always go with the ability to do the work well. See Aristotle 
on xpquariorixh, Pol, i. 3 (1253 b 14). 


adtod téxvns éxdoTw atrn 7 wdédeud eorw, 7 
Tod pvoBod Ais, an’, ei det dxpiBas oxorretobat, 
 pev tar puri) byievav Trovet, uy) be proBapyyrucy 
probov, Kal 4 pev olodopurr) oixiav, % Se pobap- 
vnTuKy) avril Emromern puobor, Kal at adAau maoat 
ouUTw* TO adTis exdorn epyov. _epyalerat Kal 
wperel € exeivo, ef? @ TETAKTAL. €av d€ ry puabos 
avri TpooylyynTat, e008” 5 1 ddedetrar 6 Snptovp- 
vos azo Tis TEXVNS 5 Ov paiverar, eon. “Ap” 

E ody odd” wheAct tore, ray Tpotka. epyalyrar; ; 


Oipa éywye. Ovdxotv, & Opactpaxe, Totro 7dy 
~ oe >) / / 35e > \ ‘ ec A 
d7jAov, Ott oddeuia tTéxvn ovde Gpyn TO avdTH 
> / 4 > > Ld / 2y2 
wdéApov mapacKkevaler, add’, dmep mada €A€yo- 
pev, TO TH aGpxouevw Kal mapacKevdler Kal 
emiTaTTEL, TO eKelvou Evpdepov qTTOvos OVTOS 
oKxoT00a, GAN’ ov TO Tod KpelrTovos. Sua 82) 
Taira éywye, @ pire Opacvpaxe, Kal dpre edeyov 
pndeva eddew ExdovTa dpyew Kal ta aAdAdrpia 
Kaka peTtayeipilecbar avopodvra, aAdAa pucbov 
> cal hid c / ~ ~ / / > , 
airety, 67s 6 weAAwy Kadds TH TEéExvN mpakew ovde- 
mote att@ To BéAtwotov mparrer odd emiTatret 
KaTa THY TéxvyV emitatTwY, dAAad TH apyouevw 
dv 8) eveca, Ws Eouxe, puoOov Seiv bmdpyew Tots 
péeArovaw eledAjoew dpxew, 7 apyvpiov 7H TY, 
nn / 2\ \ + 
7) Cnpiav, éav pr apn. oe sue 
Ilds rotro déyers, & LawKpares; edn o 
L Aavkwv. Tovs pev yap dvo pxabovs yuyvesaKes® 
TI de Cnuiav 7 HvTiwa A€yets Kal ws ev puobod pepe 
eipnkas, ov €uviKa. Tov trav BeAtiotwy apa 

* xaxd=troubles, miséres, 517 p, For the thought ef, 
343 En, 345 ©, Xen. Mem. ii. 1. 8, Herod. i. 97. 
> Cf. 345 £, Aristot. Eth. Vic. 1134b 6. 



“ Then the benefit, the receiving of wages does not 
accrue to each from his own art. But if we are to 
consider it “ precisely ’ medicine produces health but 
the fee-earning art the pay, and architecture a house 
but the fee-earning art accompanying it the fee, and 
so with all the others, each performs its own task and 
benefits that over which it is set, but unless pay is 
added to it is there any benefit which the cr. an 
receives from the craft?” “Apparently not,” he said. 
“Does he then bestow no benefit either when he 
works for nothing?”’ “I'll say he does.” ‘“‘ Then, 

achus, is not this immediately apparent, that 
no art or office provides what is beneficial for itself _ 
—but as we said long ago it provides and enjoins — 
what is beneficial to its subject, considering the ad-~ 
vantage of that, the weaker, and not the advantage 
of the stronger? That was why, friend Thrasymachus, 
I was just now saying that no one of his own will 
chooses to hold rule and office and take other people’s 
troubles ? in hand to straighten them out, but every- 
body expects pay for that, because he who is to 
exercise the art rightly never does what is best for 
himself or enjoins it when he gives commands accord- 
ing to the art, but what is best for the subject. 
* That is the reason, it seems, why pay ® must be pro- 
vided for those who are to consent to rule, either in 
the form of money or honour or a penalty if they 

XIX. “What do you mean by that, Socrates?” 
said Glaucon. “The two wages I recognize, but the 
penalty you speak of and described as a form of wage 
I don’t understand.‘” ‘‘ Then,” said I, “ you don’t 

¢ Plato habitually explains metaphors, abstractions, and 
complicated definitions in this dramatic fashion. Cf. 352 x, 
S77 a, 413 a, 429 c, 488 Bb, 510 B. 



B puoBev, edn, od Eves, 8” dv dpxovow of em- 
euéoTarou, oTav ebehwow dpxew. % ovk oloba, 
6Tt TO Prrddruov te Kai diAdpyupov elvar dveidos 
A€yerat TE Kal corw; "Eywye, én. Ata taira 
Tolvvy, iy 8 ey, ovre Xpnparov eveka e0édovow 
apxew ot dyaboi ovre TYAS oure yap davepads 
TMpaTTopmevor THs apXAS eveka. puobov poburoi 
Bovdovrat KekAjoba, ovre AdOpa adrot ek THS 
apis AapBavovres Krérrat> 08d” ad Tyas évexa 

C od yap elou Prrdrioe. det 57) adrois dvayrny 
mpoceivar Kal Cnulav, et peMovow eGerew a, apxew" 
d0ev xwduvever TO éxdvTa éml TO dpxew lévar adAAd 
pe) avaryKnv Tepuyrevew aioxpov vevopicbar. Ths 
de Cnuias peyiorn TO U0 Tovnporepov apxecbat, 
€av 41) avros eGéAn dpxewv" nv deioavrés poe 
datvovra: dpxew, Stav apywow, of emekets, Kat 
Tore épxovrar emt TO apyxew, ovyx os em ayabov 
Tt tovres ovd” wes edrrabijoovres ev avr, 1AN’ ws 
ém dvaykatov Kal ovK exovres €avta@v BeATioow 

D émitpépar ovdde dpoiots. errel Kuduvevel, moXus 
dvSpav ayabay | el yévolto, TEpYLAXNTOY | av elvae 
TO py) apxew, Womep vuvl TO apxeww, Kal jenqadd 

@ Cf. Aristot. Pol.1318 b 36. Ina good democracy the better 
classes will be content, for they will not be ruled by worse 
men. Cf. Cicero, Ad ‘Att. ii. 9 ** male vehi malo alio guber- 
nante quam tam ingratis vectoribus bene gubernare”’; 
Democ. fr. 49 D.: ‘It is hard to be ruled by a worse man;” 
Spencer, Data of Ethics, § 77. 

> The good and the necessary is a favourite Platonic 
antithesis, but the necessary is often the condicio sine qua 
non of the good. Cf.:358 c, 493 c, 540 B, Laws 628 c-p, 
858 a. Aristotle took over the idea, Met. 1072 b 12. 

¢ This suggests an ideal state, but not more strongly than 
Meno 100 a, 89 8. 



understand the wages of the best men for the sake 
of which the finest spirits hold office and rule when 
they consent to do so. Don’t you know that to be 
covetous of honour and covetous of money is said to 
be and is a reproach?” “I do,” he said. “ Well, 
then,” said I, “ that is why the good are not willing 
to rule either for the sake of money or of honour. 
They do not wish to collect pay openly for their 
service of rule and be styled hirelings nor to take it 
by stealth from their office and be called thieves, 
nor yet for the sake of honour, for they are 
not covetous of honour. So there must be imposed 
some compulsion and penalty to constrain them 
to rule if they are to.consent to hold office.” That is 
perhaps why to seek office oneself and not await 
compulsion is thought disgraceful. But the_chief 
penalty is to be governed by someone worse? if 
a man will not himself hold office-and-rule- It is 
from fear of this, as it appears to me, that the better 
sort hold office when they do, and then they go to it 
not in the expectation of enjoyment nor as to a 
good thing,” but as to a necessary evil and because 
they are unable to turn it over to better men 
than themselves or to their like. For we may ven- 
ture to say that, if there should be a city of good 
men ° only, immunity from office-holding would be as 
eagerly contended for as office is now,’ and there it 

# The paradox suggests Spencer’s altruistic competition 
and Archibald Marshall’s Upsidonia. Cf. infra 521 a, 586, 
Isoc. vii. 24, xii. 145; Mill, On Representative Government, 
p- 56: “The good despot . . . can hardly be imagined as 
consenting to undertake it unless as a refuge from intolerable 
evils;’ ibid. p. 200: ‘“* Until mankind in general are of 
opinion with Plato that the proper person to be entrusted 
with power is the person most unwilling to accept it,” 

VOL. I G 81 


av Katagavés yevéoba, Sti TH dvtt aAnOwos 
apxwv od méduxe TO atT@ ovpdépov ocKxoretobat, 
> \ ‘ ~ 2? / Ld ~ n c LA 

aa 70 7 dpxopevy Gore mas dv 6 yryvasoKav 
70 Wohereicbar wadAdov eAoito bm’ adAov 7 aAAov 
ogeddv mpdypwata exew. TodTo pev ody Eywye 
E ovdayA ovyywpS Opacvyayw, ws Td Sikaidv eore 
‘ ~ , , > A ~ A A 
TO TOO Kpeitrovos Evydéepov. aAAd Todro pev 87 

‘ > ~ , ‘\ , a“ a 
kai eloaibis oxersopueba: odd 5é pou Soxet petlov 
elvat, 6 viv Aéyer Opactdpayos, Tov Tob adiKov 
, 7 , hal A ~ Py , ov 

Biov ddoxwy elvar Kpeittw 7 Tov Tob SiKaiov. 

“ ‘ 
otv métepov, jv 8 eyd, & Travcwv, atpet Kat 
trotépws aAnfeatépws Soxet cor AéeyeoBar; Tov 

= / 
tod Siuxaiov eywye, &€bn, AvoiteAeotepov Biov 
348 elvar. “Hxovoas, Fv 8 eyw, daa aptt Opacd- 
praxos ayaba difAbe TH tod adixov; “Hxovea, 
€fn, GAN od zeiBoua. BovrAet ody adrov mei- 
Owyev, dv Svvdpebd wy eEevpeiv, ds odk aAnbi 
~ \ 
Aéyet; Tlds yap od BovAopa; 4 8 ds. “Av pev 
toivuv, Hv 8 eyd, avriuatatelvavtes Adywpev 
atT@ Adyov mapa Adyov, doa ad ayaba exe TO 
dixavov elvar, Kai adfis odtos, Kat GAAov rpets, 
apiOweiv Sejoe tayabd Kai petpetv, doa EKdTEpor 
Bev éxarépw A€youev, al 7dn dixaotav twav Tov 
dvaxpwovvtwr Senoducba: av Sé domep aptt avopo- 
Aoyovpevor pos aAAjAovs cko7@pmev, dua adrot 

* eicai@s lays the matter on the table. Cf. 430c. The 
suggestiveness of Thrasymachus’s definition is exhausted, 
and Socrates turns to the larger question and main theme 
of the Republic raised by the contention that the unjust life 
is happier and more profitable than the just. 

» This is done in 358 p ff. It is the favourite Greek 



man oy 2 Dea al cS a 

public SeVVICe soiviX '2 ,Concev 

pal! eC wi 2\ 
would be made plain that in very truth the true 
ruler does not naturally seek his own advantage but 
that of the ruled ; so that every man of understand- 
ing would rather choose to be benefited by another 
than to be bothered with benefiting him. This point 
then I by no means concede to Thrasymachus, that 
justice is the advantage of the superior. But that 
we will reserve for another occasion.* A far weightier 
matter seems to me Thrasymachus’s present state- 
ment, his assertion that the life of the unjust man is 
better than that of the just. Which now do you 
choose, Glaucon ?” said-¥, “and which seems to you 
to be the truer statement?” “ That the life of the’ 
just man is more profitable, I say,” he replied. “ Did) 
you hear,” said I, “ all the goods that Thrasymachus 
just now enumerated for the life of the unjust man?” 
“TI heard,” he said, “ but I am not convinced.” 
“Do you wish us then to try to persuade him, 
supposing we can find a way, that what he says is 
not true?” “ Of course I wish it,” he said. “If 
then we oppose ® him in a set speech enumerating in 
turn the advantages of being just and he replies and 
we rejoin, we shall have to count up and measure the 
goods listed in the respective speeches and we shall 
forthwith be in need of judges to decide between 
us. But if, as in the preceding discussion, we come 
to terms with one another as to what we admit in 
the inquiry, we shall be ourselves both judges and 

method of balancing pros and cons in set speeches and anti- 

thetic enumerations. Cf. Herod. viii. 83, the dcad¢tas (Diels, — 

Vorsokratiker ii. pp. 334-345), the choice of Heracles (Xen. 
Mem. ii. 1), and the set speeches in Euripides. With this 
method the short question and answer of the Socratic dia- 
lectic is often contrasted. Cf. Protag. 329 a, 334-335, Gorg. 
461-462, also Gorg. 471 ©, Cratyl. 437 p, Theaetet. 171 a. 



THE REPUBLIC, BOOK 1'"\*\ “++ 






Te Sikacral Kal prjropes eooucba. Ildvy pev obv, 
egy. Ilorépws ovv cor, fv 8 eyd, apéoKer; 
Oitws, én. 

XX. "Td af. Hv oi eye, a) Opacdpaxe, amd- 
Kpwat nuiv €€ apyfs: Thy TeAdav dduKiay TeAeas 
ovons Sucaroovvns Avavredcorépay ons elvat; 

C Ildvu pev obv kal dnt, eon, Kal & a, etpyka.. 
Pépe 57) TO To.ovoe _Tmepl adT@v ms reyes; 70 
pev Tov dperiy avrotv kadeis, To be KaKlay; 
Ids yap ov; Odxoby THY Lev Sicarooduny & dperiy, 
Thy de dductay Kakiav; Eixds y’, dn, & Hodvore, 
emed1) Kal _ eyo dductay bev Avoitedetv, Sucato~ 
avvnv e ov. *AMa zi pay; Todvarriov, 4} 8 és. 
°*H TH Suxavoovvnv Kaxkiav; Ov, adda mavu 
yervaiay ed7Pevav. Ti ddiciav dpa KaKonbevav 

D kaneis ; Ovk, GAN’ ebBovriav, dn. *H Kal pove- 
pot cot, ® Mpacvpaye, Soxodow elvar Kal ayaBot 
of adikor; Ol ye TeA€ws, édn, ofol Te aduKeiv, 70- 
Aes Te Kal €Ovn Suvdpevor avOpamwv bd’ EavTods 
mrovetaBau- ad dé oles pe tows Tous 7a Baddvrva 
dmroréuvovras Aéyeuw. AvorreAc? pev ovr, 7 8S’ 6s, 
Kal Ta Toabra, edvrep AavOavn €ore be ovk agva 

E Adyou, adW’ a viv 8) eAeyov. Todro pevror, edny, 
ovK ayvo® 6 Tu BovrAa A€yew: adAa 7d5€ EVadpaca, 

* Thrasymachus’s “ Umwertung aller Werte” reverses the 
normal application of the words, as Callicles does in Gorg. 

¥ Thrasymachus recoils from the extreme position. 
Socrates’ inference from the etymology of ev7jdea (ef. 343 c) 
is repudiated. Injustice is not turpitude (bad character) but 
—discretion. e’Sovda in a higher sense is what Protagoras 
teaches (Protag. 318 £) and in the highest sense is the wisdom 
of Plato’s guardians (infra 428 B). 


USACE PYinetP\S “XH ov gery 
OVaa~* a, a oy Ww 1" e Ww 

pleaders.” ‘* Quite so,” he said. ‘“‘ Which method 
do you like best?” said I, “ This one,” he said. 
XX. “Come then, Thrasymachus,” I said, “go back 
to the beginning and answer us. You affirm that per- 
fect and complete injustice is more profitable. than 
justice that is complete.’ “I affirm it,” he said, 
“and have told you my reasons.” “Tell me then 
how you would express yourself on this point about 
them. You call one of them, I presume, a virtue 
and the other a vice?” “Of course.” “ Justice 
the virtue and injustice the vice?” “It is likely,* 
ou innocent, when I say that injustice pays and 
justice doesn’t pay.” “But what then, pray?” 
“ The opposite,” he replied. “‘ What! justice vice?” 
“No, but a most noble simplicity® or goodness of 
heart.” “Then do you call injustice badness of 
heart ?”- “ No, but goodness of judgement.”” “ Do 
you also, Thrasymachus, regard~the-wnjust as in- 
telligent and good?” ‘“ Yes, if they are capable of 
complete injustice,” he said, “ and are able to sub- 
ject to themselves cities and tribes of men. But you 
probably suppose that I mean those who take purses. 
There is profit to be sure even in that sort of thing,” 
he said, “ if it goes undetected. But such things are 
not worth taking into the account, but only what I 
just described.” ‘‘I am not unaware of your mean- 
ing in that,” I said; “ but this is what surprised me,° 

© Socrates understands the theory, and the distinction 
between wholesale injustice and the petty profits that are 
not worth mentioning, but is startled by the paradox that 
injustice will then fall in the category of virtue and wisdom. 
Thrasymachus affirms the paradox and is brought to self- 
contradiction by a subtle argument (349-350 c) which may 
pass as a dramatic illustration of the game of question and 
answer. Cf. Introd. p. x. 


at ia > 

4 — 
‘2 LY '¢ 

A © 


et €v apeTis Kat oogias Os pépet TV dduciar, 
THY S€ Suxavoadyynv €v Tots évavrious. "AMG mavu 
ovtw TiOnut. Todro, qv 8 eyed, 78n orepewrepov, 
& éraipe, Kal ovKeru pddiwov éxew 6 ti tis etry). 
et yep Avovredety pev THY aduKiav eriBeco, karlay 
pevrou 7 aicxpov avro wpordoyeis elvan, worrep 
aAdou tives, etxopev av Tt A€yew KaTa TA vopito- 
preva. Aéyovres: viv d€ d7jAos el 6 OTt procs avro kal 
KaAov Kat toxupov elvar kat tadAa adr@ mavro. 
349 mpoobyaets, & a jyets TO Suxatyy mpoceriBepev, € €7EL- 
57) ye Kal é€v dperh adTo Kal copia. eroAunoas 
Oeivan. “AAnbéorara, edn, pavrevel. "AM od 
pevrou, Hv 5° eye, dmroKvnTeov ye T@ Adyw eme€- 
eAGeiv oKoTrovpevor, ews av oe drrohapBdven A€yew 
dep dtavoel. pot yap doKets ov, 3) Opacvpaxe, 
atexv@s viv od oxwnrew, adAa 7a SoKodvra TeEpi 
fs ar Bet déyew. Te d€ got, edn, TodTo 
Tihs aAnbeias A€yew € got, én, 
Sivadhéper, ire prot Soxet elTe up adn’ od Tov Adyov 
B ereyxets ; Ovdev, Vy 8 éyw. adda 708¢ poe 
Tetp@ €Tt 7pos TOUTOLS dmoxpivacbau: 6 Sixaros 
Tod Suxaiov Soxet ti aor av eOdAew mAov Exew; 

@ #5y marks the advance from the affirmation that injustice 
is profitable to the point of asserting that it is a virtue. 
This is a “stiffer proposition,” i.e. harder to refute, or 
possibly more stubborn. 

> e.g. Polus in Gorg. 474 ff., 482 p-e. Cf. Isoc. De Pace 
31. Sabie is too wary to separate the xaxéy and 
the aicxpév and expose himself to a refutation based on con- 
ventional usage. Cf. Laws 627 p, Polit. 306 a, Laws 662 a. 

° Cf. supra on 346 a. 

4 repli ris dd\nOelas suggests the dogmatic titles of sophistic 
and pre-Socratic boo oe Cf. Antiphon, p. 553 Diels, 
Campbell on Theaetet. 161 c, and Aristot. Met. passim. 



that you should range injustice under the head 
of virtue and wisdom, and justice in the opposite 
class.” “ Well, I do so class them,” he said. “‘ That,” 
said I, “is a stiffer proposition,? my friend, and if 
you are going as far as that it is hard to know 
what to answer. For if your position were that in- 
justice is profitable yet you conceded it to be vicious 
and disgraceful as some other? disputants do, there 
would be a chance for an argument on conventional 
principles. But, as it is, you obviously are going to 
affirm that it is honourable and strong and you will 
attach to it all the other qualities that we were 
assigning to the just, since you don’t shrink from 
putting it in the category of virtue and wisdom.” 
“You are a most veritable prophet,’”’ he replied. 
“ Well,” said I, “‘ I mustn’t flinch from following out 
the logic of the inquiry, so long as I conceive you to 
be saying what you think.* For now, Thrasymachus, 
I absolutely believe that you are not ‘ mocking’ us 
but telling us your real opinions about the truth.*” 
“What difference does it make to you,” he said, 
“‘ whether I believe it or not? Why don’t you test 
the argument?” “No difference,” said I, “ but 
‘ here is something I want you to tell me in addition 
to what you have said. Do you think the just man 
would want to overreach® or exceed anothér just 

* In pursuance of the analogy between-the virtues and the 
arts the moral idea x\covetia (overreaching, getting more 
than your share; see on 359 c) is generalized to include 
doing more than or differently from. English can hardly 
reproduce this. Jowett’s Shakespearian quotation (King 
John tv. ii. 28), 

When workmen strive to do better than well, 
They do confound their skill in covetousness, 
though apt, only illustrates the thought in part. 


Ovdauds, bn: od yap av Hv aoreios, damep viv, 
Kat ediOns. Ti dé; Tis ducatas mpdfews ; Ovde 
THs Sikaias, épn. Tod d€ adicov TOTEpoV dfvot & av 
TAcovexreiv Kal jyotro Sicavov elvat, 7 ovK av 
myotro | Sixauov ; “Hyotr’ av, i] 8 6s, Kat avot, 
add’ ovK av Suvaito. “AM ob Tobro, hv & eye, 
EpuTa, GAN’ «i Tod jeev Sixatov yay agwot mA€ov 
EXEL pnde Botrera 6 dikatos, Tob dé ddikov; 
"AAN odtws, Edy, exer. Ti dé 57 é dducos ; dpa 
aéiot tod SiKaiov aheoverrety kat THs Sucatas 
mpagews; lds yap otk; édn, ds ye mavtwv 
mréov exew abtot. Odxodv Kal ddixov avOpe- 
Tov Te Kat mpdfews 6 dduKos mAcoveKTHOEL Kal 
duirArjoeta ws amavtwy mAciotov avros AadBy; 
“Eort tara. 

XXII. *Ode 87) Adywrev, Ednv: 6 Sixatos Too pwev 
oprotov ob meoven ret, Tob de dvopoiou, 6 5€ dduKos 
TOD Te dpotou Kal tod avopoiov. “Apiora, épn, 
eipnkas. "Eott dé ye, ednv, dpovids Te Kat 
dyabos 6 aduxos, 6 Oe diavos ovd€repa. Kai 
Tobr, €dn, eb. Ovxody, jv & eyes, Kal EOLKE 7 
ppovipn Kal TO aya 6 ad.Kos, 6 be diKkatos ovK 
eoxev; Ilds yap od peer, eon), 6 TovodTos av 
Kai €ouxévat Tots TowovTos, 6 S€ pi) €oiKevat; 
Kadd&s. towobdros dpa éoriv éxdtepos adrav olomep 

eouxev. “AXAd ri pedAAct; &dn. Elev, & Opacd- 

* The assumption that a thing is what it is like is put as 
an inference from Thrasymachus’s ready admission that the 
unjust man is wise and good and is like the wise and good. 
Jevons says in “* Substitution of Similars’’: “* Whatever is true 
of a thing is true of its like.’’ But practical logic requires 
the qualification “in respect of their likeness.’’ Socrates, 



man?” “By no means,” he said; ‘‘ otherwise he 
would not be the delightful simpleton that he is.” 
“ And would he exceed or overreach or go beyond 
the just action?” “ Not that either,” he replied. 
“But how would he treat the unjust man— 
would he deem it proper and just to outdo, over- 
reach, or go beyond him or would he not?” ‘ He 
would,” he said, “but he wouldn’t be able to.” 
“That is not my question,” I said, “‘ but whether it 
is not the fact that the just man does not claim or 
wish to outdo the just man but only the unjust?” 

“ That is the case,” he replied. “‘ How about the 
unjust then? Does he claim to overreach and outdo 
the just man and the just.action?”’ ‘“ Of course,” 

he said, “since he claims to overreach and get the 
better of everything.” ‘“ Then the unjust man will 
overreach and outdo also both the unjust man and the 
unjust action, and all his endeavour will be to get 
the most in everything for himself.” ‘‘ That is so.” 

XXI. “ Let us put it in this way,” I said; “ the 
just man does not seek to take advantage of his like 
but of his unlike, but the unjust man of both.” “ Ad- 
mirably put,” he said. *‘ But the unjust man is in- 
telligent and good and the just man neither.” “That, 
too, is right,” he said. “ Is it not also true,” I said, 
“that the unjust man is like the intelligent and 
good and the just man is not?” “ Of course,” he 
said, ‘‘ being such he will be like to such and the 
other not.”” “‘ Excellent. Then each is such? as that 
to which he is like.” “ What else do you suppose ? ” 

however, argues that since the just man is like the good 
craftsman in not overreaching, and the oat craftsman is 
good, therefore the just man is good. e conclusion is 
sound, and the analogy may have a basis of psychological 
truth; but the argument is a verbal fallacy. 



praxye* povoikov S€ twa Héyeis, Erepov Sé dovaov* 
“Eywye. IIdrepov dpovysov Kat mOTEpov dppova ; 
Tov peéev povorkov Sijrrov dpovysov, Tov dé G, dwovaov 

adpova. Odxodv Kat amep Ppoveov, ayabov, a 
be adpova, KaKkov; Nai. Te be tarpucdy ; ovx 

ovTws; Odrws. Aoxet a av ovv Tis oot, @ aptorte, 
povouKds dviip dppoTTopLevos Avpav €GéXew povar- 
Kod avdpos € ev TH emirdoet Kal avéce. TOV xopdar 
mAcoventeiy 7 afwodv mAéov éxew; Od cwouye. 
Ti d€; dpovoov; ’Avdy«n, edn. T be larpe- 
350 KOs; ev TH edwdf 7 7 moaet eOerew a av Tt taTpiKod 
mAcovextetv 7 avdpos 7 Tpdyparos ; Od dijra. 
M7 tarpucod dé; Nai. Ilepi mdons be 6pa. 
emoTnuns Te Kat dvemaTnLoovrns, et tis cot 
Ket emoThwev doraoby meiw a dy eO€Aew aipet- 
ba 7 i, doa aMos € Emory 7 mparrew i A€yew, 
Kat ov tavdTa 70 omolw éauT@ eis Ty adray 
mpatw. “AA tows, édn, avayKn T0076 ye ovrws 

EXEL. Ti dé 6 dvemloripLewv 5 odxt opotis pev 
B ETLOTHMOVOS meoverticevev av, Spolws d€ dvem- 

OTTLOVOS ; "Iows. ‘O dé emuoripwr codds; On- 
pl. ‘O de oogos dyabds ; Dypt. ‘O dpa ayalos 
Te Kal codos TOD pev Opotiov ovK ebeAjoet mAcov- 

* Cf. 608 ©, Gorg. 463 ©, Protag. 332 a, 358 p, Phaedo 
103 c, Soph. 226 8, Phileb. 345, Meno 75 p, 88 a, Ale. I. 
128 s, Cratyl. 385 8. The formula, which is merely used to 
obtain formal r nition of a term or idea required in the 
argument, readily in ds itself to modern parody. Socrates 
seems to have gone far afield. Thrasymachus answers rer 
confidently, éywye, but in dyrov there is a hint of bewi 
ment as to the object of it all. 

> Familiar Socratic doctrine. Cf. Laches 194 p, Lysis 
210 v, Gorg. 504 v. 

© a)eovexrei is here a virtual synonym of rdéov éxew. The 



he said. “ Very well, Thrasymachus, but do you 
recognize that one man is a musician® and another 
-unmusieal?’’ “I do.” ‘ Which is the intelligent 
-and which the unintelligent?” “The musician, I 
presume, is the intelligent and the unmusical the 
unintelligent.” ‘‘ And is he not good in the things 
in which he is intelligent ® and bad in the things in 
which he is unintelligent?” “Yes.” “‘ And the 
same of the physician?’’ ‘“ The same.” ‘“‘ Do you 
think then, my friend, that any musician in the 
tuning of a lyre would want to overreach ° another 
musician in the tightening and relaxing of the strin 
or would claim and think fit to exceed or outdo him ?” 
“T do not.” “ But would he the unmusical man?” 
“Of necessity,” he said. “And how about the 
medical man? In prescribing food and drink would 
he want to outdo the medical man or the medical 
procedure?’ “Surely not.” “ But he would the un- 
medical man?” ‘‘Yes.’’ “Consider then with regard 
to all* forms of knowledge and ignorance whether 
you think that anyone who knows would choose to 
do or say other or more than what another who 
knows would do or say, and not rather exactly what 
his like would do in the same action.” “ Why, 
perhaps it must be so,” he said, “in such cases.” 
“ But what of the ignorant man—of him who does 
not know? Would he not overreach or outdo equally 
the knower and the ignorant?” “It may be.” 
“But the one who knows is wise?” “I'll say so.” 
“ And the wise is good?” “I'll say so.” “Then 
he who is good and wise will not wish to overreach 

two terms help the double meaning. Cf. Laws 691 a meov- 
exTeiy. Tov vouwy. 

# Generalizing from the inductive instances. 


a ~ \ > / ae , ” 
exteiv, TOD S€ dvomoiov Te Kal évaytiov. “Eouxev, 
” ¢ \ / \ > \ ~ ¢ | eae 
edn. ‘O 5€ Kakds Te Kat apabys tod Te dpotov 
kal tod évavriov. Daiverar. OvKodv, & Opacd- 
paye, Hv S° eyed, 6 ddiKos Huiv Tod avopolov Te Kat 
Opotov mAcovektel; 7 ovxY OUTWs eAeyes; “Eywye, 

C édn. ‘O S€ ye Sixatos Tod prev dpoiov od mAcov- 
exTnoel, TOD dé avopoiov; Nai. “Eouxev dpa, i 
5’ éyd, 6 pev Sikawos TH ood kai dyal@, o de 
»” al ~ ‘ > cal , > ‘A 
dduxos TH Kak@ Kai apabe?. Kuwdvvever. “AAG 
pnv dporoyotuev, @ ye dpotos éxdrepos «tn, 
Towodrov Kal éKatepov elvat. ‘Quodoyotmev yap. 
¢ A + ‘ @ i > / * > /, 
O pev dpa Sixaos Hyiv avarépavra, dv ayabds 
Te Kal codds, 6 dé dducos apuabys TE Kal KaKds. 

XXII. ‘O d€ Opactpayos dpoddynoe pev mavra 
~ > ¢ A ~ c Ud / > > i7 / 

D radra, ody ws eyw viv padiws rAéyw, add’ €dKo- 
pevos Kal poyis, peta Ldp@ros Oavpactod daov, 
are Kat Oépovs dvtos: Tote Kal eldov eyw, mpd- 

A ” 4 > ~ > \ 

tepov dé oUmw, Opacipayov epvlpidvra. €zrerd7) 

Sé ody Suwpodroynoducla tiv Sucavoodvnv apeTHv 


elvan kat oodiav, tHv dé adikiay KaKkiav Te Kal 

dpabiav, Etev, jv 8 eyw, tobro pev qyiv ovTw 

keioOw, edapev dé 8) Kal loxvpov elvar THY 

aduxiav: 7) od péuvnca, & Opacdpaxe; Méuvy- 
»” > > » Oo. a“ ~ ta > / 

par, edn: add’ Euouye odde a viv A€yers apéoKet, 

Kal éyw wept adtdv Aéyew. ei odv Aéyoyu, &d 
a ” 

ofS’ dre Snunyopeiv av pe pains: 7 ody €a pe 

* Cf. 334. 

> Cf. Protag. 333 8. 

¢ Cf, the blush of the sophist in Huthydem. 297 a. 

@ The main paradox of Thrasymachus is refuted. It will 
be easy to transfer the other laudatory epithets icxupér, ete., 
from injustice back to justice. 'Thrasymachus at first refuses 



his like but his unlike and opposite.”’ “‘ It seems so,” 
he said. “ But the bad man and the ignoramus will 
overreach both like and unlike?” ‘“‘ So it appears.” 
“ And does not our unjust man, Thrasymachus, over- 
reach both unlike and like ? Did you not say that?” 
“I did,” he replied. “ But the just man will not 
overreach his like but only his unlike?” “ Yes.” 
“Then the just man is like the wise and good, and 
the unjust is like the bad and the ignoramus.” “ It 
seems likely.” “But furthermore we agreed that 
each is such as that to which he is like.”” “ Yes, we 
did.” “Then the just man has turned out? on our 
hands to be good and wise and the unjust man bad 
and ignorant.” 

XXII. Thrasymachus made all these admissions not 
as I now lightly narrate them, but with much baulk- 
ing and reluctance ® and prodigious sweating, it being 
summer, and it was then I beheld what I had never 
seen before—Thrasymachus blushing. But when we 
did reach our conclusion that justice is virtue and 
wisdom and injustice vice and ignorance, ‘‘ Good,” 
said I, “let this be taken as established.4 But we 
were also affirming that injustice is a strong and 
potent thing. Don’t you remember, Thrasymachus ? ”’ 
“T remember,” he said; “but I don’t agree with 
what you are now saying either and I have an answer 
to it, but if I were to attempt to state it, I know 
very well that you would say that I was delivering 
a harangue.’ Either then allow me to speak at such 

to share in the discussion but finally nods an ironical assent 
to everything that Socratessays. SoCalliclesin Gorg. 510. 
¢ This is really a reminiscence of such passages as Theaetet. 
162 v, Protag. 336 8, Gorg. 482 c, 494 p, 513 4 ff.,519p. The 
only justification for it in the preceding conversation is 

348 a-B, 


etrretv doa BovAopar, 7 UE et Bowrec épwrdy, €pwra. 
eyw 5é€ cor, aorep | tais ypavot tais tovs pvbovs 
Aeyovoats, elev €p® kal Kkaravevoopat Kal dva- 
vevoouat. Mydapas, jv 8 eyes, | Tapa ye. THY 
cavTod ddgav. "“Qore cot, eon, dpéoKer, €7TEL- 
Sijrep ovK eds Aéyew. KatTou wt aAXo Bower; 
Oddev pa Ata, hv &° eye, GAN’ elep TOUTO Tr0Ln- 
gets, motet eyo dé € epwTnow. "Ep wra 84. Todro 
TOLvUY €pwrd, Orep dprt, iva Kal ere s SvacKeysa- 
351 pba Tov Adyov, Omotov Tt Tuyxaver ov Suxaroovyn 
7pos dduciar. eAexn yap mov, OTt Kal duvata- 
TEpov Kal ioxupdorepov ein aduKia Sixavoodyns: 
vov dé y’, edny, eimep aodia te Kal dpery éort 
duxatoovvyn, padiws, olwat, pavijcerat Kat ioxupo- 
TEpov ddiKias, émevdnyrT€p eorly dpabia 7 aducia. 
ovdeis dv ett TodTO dyvonaeter, adn’ obrt —_ 
aTAds, & Opactvpaye, eywye emBupe, ada 
7 oKepacba- modw pains av daduxov elvas kal 
BdAas zodews emuyeupetv Sovrodaba ddixers | Kal 
KaTadedovrAdobar, moh\as de Kal bd’ éaurij exe 
Sovdwoaperny Ils yap ovK; dn: Kai TOUTS © 
ye 7) apioTn paAvora TounoeL Kal TeAewrara oboe 
adiuxos. Mavéavw, epny, OTL aos obros Hv 6 
Adyos: adAAa rode mept adroo oKom@: TOTEpOV 7H) 
Kpetrroy yeyvopern moXus ToAews dvev Sucaroovyns 
Thy Svvayw Tavray Efe, 7 avdyKn atrh peta 
C Sixatoodvns; Ei pév, édn, ws od dptu reyes 

2 So Polus in Gorg. 461 pv. 

> Cf. Gorg. 527 a. 

¢ Cf. 331 ¢, 386 8. Instead of the simple or absolute 
argument that justice, since it is wisdom and virtue, must 
be stronger, etc., than injustice, Socrates wishes to bring out 
the deeper thought that the unjust city or man is strong not 



length as I desire, or, if you prefer to ask questions, 

go on questioning and I, as we do for old wives? telling 

their tales, will say “Very good’ and will nod assent 

and dissent.’’ ‘No, no,” said I, “not counter to 

your own belief.” “Yes, to please you,” he said, 

“since you don’t allow me freedom of speech. And 

yet what more do you want?” “Nothing, indeed,” 

said I; “but if this is what you propose to do, do 

it, and I will ask the questions.” ‘‘ Ask on, then.’’ 

“ This, then, is the question I ask, the same as before, Q hd 

so that our inquiry may proceed in sequence. What x ae 

is the nature of injustice as compared with justice?) \\yo+ 

For the statement made, I believe, was that injustice\ = 

is a more potent and stronger thing than justice.| q , 

But now,” I said, “ if justice is wisdom and virtue, it 

will easily, I take it, be shown to be also a stronger , .* 

thing than injustice, since injustice is ignorance—no ~~ 

one could now fail to recognize that—but what I 

want is not quite so simple as that. I wish, Thrasy- : 

machus, to consider it in some such fashion as this. it 

A city, you would say, may be unjust and try 5 

to enslave other cities unjustly, have them enslaved 

and hold many of them in subjection.” “‘ Certainly,” 

he said; “and this is what the best state will 

chiefly do, the state whose injustice is most com- 

plete.” “I understand,” I said, “ that this was your 

view. But the point that I am considering is this: 

whether the city that thus shows itself superior to 

another will have this power without justice or 

whether she must of necessity combine it with jus- 

tice.” “‘If,4” he replied, “ what you were just now 

because but in spite of his injustice and by virtue of some 

saving residue of justice. 

— iabesisictectan can foresee the implications of either 



” ¢ 8 4 / A 8 Y > 
exet, 7) Suxaoovvn codia, pera SuKaroodvyns* et 
8’ ws éyd eeyov, pera adixias. Ildvy dyapat, 
qv & eyd, & Opactpaye, Ste odK emwveders pOvov 
\ > ~ 
Kat avavevets, aAAd Kal amoKpiver mdvu Kadds. 
Lot yap, dy, xapilopar. 
XXIII. Ed ye od qmoudv: adAa 8) Kal Tdde pot 
4 a 
dpicat Kal A€ye* Soxeis dv 7 7OAW 7) oTpatdrredov 
a” ~ 
9 Anotas 7 KAémtas 7 GAAo tT EOvos, doa Kow? 
1 pee »” lod 
emi Te epyeTar adikws, mpagar av te Svvacba, € 
> aA ~ 
D dducotev adAjAouvs; Od Sra, F 8 ds. Ti & 
> > a ~ 
ef pn adsixoiev; od paddov; lav ye. LUraces 
ydp mov, & Opactpaye, WY ye ddiKia Kal pion 
‘ / > > / /, ¢ A , 
kat payas ev addjAows mapéxer, 7) Se ScKavocdvy 
dpovorav Kal didiavy 4 yap; “Eorw, 7 5’ os, 
” \ , + , A 
iva cou pn dvadeépwyar. “AA” ed ye ad Tow, 
® dptote. trode 5é por Aéyes dpa et TOTO Epyov 
> a a -~ 
adikias, picos eumoety dmov av évp, o¥ Kal ev 
eXevblépors te Kal Sovdous eyyryvopern purcetv 
moumoe. aAAjAovs Kal oracidlew Kal advvatous 
Eeivat xown pet aAdAjAwy mpdtrew; lav ye. 
Ti dé; dv ev Svoiv eyyévnrat, od Sdioicovrar Kat 
puojgovat Kat éxOpoi €covtac aAAjAois Te Kal 
aA , ” wv > A A , > 
tots duxaiows; “Eoovra, edn. "Eav de 37, @ 

* For the thought ef. Spencer, Data of Ethics, § 144: 
* Joint aggressions upon men outside the society cannot 
prosper if there are many aggressions of man on man within 
the society ;*’ Leslie Stephen, Science of Ethics, Chap. VIII. 
§ 31: “It (the loyalty of a thief to his gang) is rather a kind 
of spurious or class morality,’’ ete.; Carlyle: ‘* Neither 
James Boswell’s good book, nor any other good thing . - . 
is or can be performed by any man in virtue of his badness, 
but always solely in spite thereof.” Proclus, Jn Rempub. 



saying holds good, that justice is wisdom, with jus- 
tice ; if itis as I said, with injustice.” ‘‘ Admirable, 

achus,” I said; “‘ you not only nod assent 
and dissent, but give excellent answers.” “I am 
trying to please you,” he replied. 

XXIII. “ Very kind of you. But please me in one 
thing more and tell me this : do you think that a city,* 
an army, or bandits, or thieves, or any other group that 
attempted any action in common, could accomplish 
anything if they wronged one another ?”’ “ Certainly 
not,” said he. ‘ But if they didn’t, wouldn’t they 
be more likely to?” “‘ Assuredly.”’ “‘ For factions, 

oneness of mind and love. Is it not so?” “So be 
it, he replied, “ not to differ from you.” “‘ That is 
good of you, my friend; but tell me this: if it is 
the business of injustice to engender hatred wherever 
it is found, will it not, when it springs up either 
among freemen or slaves, cause them to hate and be 
at strife with one another, and make them incapable 
of effective action in common?” “ By all means.” 
“ Suppose, then, it springs up between two, will they 
not be at outs with and hate each other and be 
enemies both to one another and to the just?” “They 
will,” he said. “‘ And then will you tell me that if 

Kroll i. 20 expands this idea. Dante (Convivio 1. xii.) 
attributes to the Philosopher in the fifth of the ethics the 
saying that even robbers and plunderers love justice. Locke 
(Human Understanding i. 3) denies that this proves the 
principles of justice innate: ** They practise them as rules 
of convenience within their own communities,” ete. Cf. 
further Isoc. xii. 226 on the Spartans, and Plato, Protag. 
322 8, on the inconveniences of injustice in the state of 
nature, 7dixovy a\A7Aous. 

VOL, I H 97 




Oavpdare, ev evi eyyévntar adicia, wav ph aaroAet 
Ti abris Stvapw, 7 oddev Artov e€er; Mydev 
hrrov exétw, &byn. Odxody rordvde twa paiverar 
éyovoa tiv Suva, olav, @ av eyyevntat, elre 
moder Twi elre yéver elite oTpatoTédw elite ad\Aw 
drwobv, mp&rov pev advvarov avro Tovey mpdrrew 
pel”? adtod bia 7O oraodlew Kat diapepecba, 
ért 8° éxOpov elvac €avT@ Te Kal TH evavTim 
mavTt Kal T@ SuKaiw; odx ovtws; Llaw ye. 
Kai év évi 87, ola, evobca tadra mavta Touoet, 
dmep mebuxev épyaleobar: mp&tov pev advvatov 
avTov mpatTew Tomoe. otacidlovra Kal ody 
dpovoobvta avrov éauT@, emetta exOpov Kal éavT@ 
Kal tots dixaiows 4 yap; Nat. Aikavor b€ y 
eiaiv, @ dire, kal ot Oeot; “Eotwoav, edn. Kai 
feots dpa éxOpos eoTrar 6 adiKos, ® Opactpaye, 
6 $€ dikatos didros. Edwyot rod Adyouv, én, 
Oappav: ou yap eywye got evavTusoopat, iva 
pn Totade amexOwyar. “1h 57), jv 8 eyw, Kat 
Ta Aowrd pou THs eoTidcews amomAnpwooy aro- 
Kplwopevos womep Kal viv. OTe pev yap Kal 

« The specific function must operate universally in bond 
or free, in many, two or one. The application to the 
individual reminds us of the main argument of the Republic. 
Cf. 369 a, 434 p, 441 c. For the argument many, few or 
two, one, cf. Laws 626 c. 

® Plato paradoxically treats the state as one organism 
and the individual as many warring members (ef. Introd. 
p. xxxv). Hence, justice in one, and being a friend to 
oneself are more than metaphors for him. Cf. 621 c, 416 c, 
428 vp, Laws 626 £, 693 B, EHpist. vii. 332 p, Antiphon 556. 45 
Diels duovoet rpds €avrév. Aristotle, Hth. Nic. vy. 11, inquires 
whether a man can wrong himself, and Chrysippus (Plutarch, 
Stoic. Repug. xvi.) pronounces the expression absurd. 

¢ This is the conventional climax of the plea for any 


inj arises in one “it will lose its force and function : 
or will it none the less keep it?” “Haveitthatit | 
keeps it,” he said. “ And is it not apparent that its 
force is such that wherever it is found in city, family, 
camp, or in anything else, it first renders the thing 
incapable of co-operation with itself owing to faction 
and difference, and secondly an enemy to itself ® and 
to its opposite in every case, the just? Isn’t that 
so?” “ By all means.” “Then in the individual too, 

I presume, its presence will operate all these effects 
which it is its nature to produce. It will in the first 
place make him incapable of accomplishing anything 
because of inner faction and lack of self-agreement, 
and then an enemy to himself and to the just. Is it 
notso?” “Yes.” “ But, my friend, the gods too® 
are just.” “ Have it that they are,” he said. “So 
to the gods also, it seems, the unjust man will be 
hateful, but the just man dear.” “ Revel in your 
ancien,” he said, “without fear, for I shall not 
oppose you, so as not to offend your partisans 
here.” “Fill up the measure of my feast,’ then, 
and ‘complete it for me,” I said, “ by continuing 
to answer as you have been doing. Now that 

moral ideal. So Aristotle, Eth. Nic. 1179 a24, proves that 
the cogés being likest God is Geogthéoraros. Cf. Democ. fr. 
217 D. podvor Geogirdes Scars ExOpdv 7d décxeiv; infra 382 zB, 
612 8, Phileb. 39 zr, Laws 716. The“ enlightened ” Thrasy- 
machus is disgusted at this dragging in of the gods. Cf. 
Theaetet. 162 D Beots re eis Td uécov Gyorres. He is reported 
as saying (Diels p. 544. 40) that the gods regard not human 
affairs, else they would not have overlooked the greatest of 
goods, justice, which men plainly do not use. 

4 éstidcews keeps up the image of the feast of reason. Cf. 
354 a-B, Lysis 211 c, Gorg. 522 a, Phaedr. 227 B, and Tim. 
17 a, from which perhaps it became a commonplace in Dante 
and the Middle Ages. 



oopusTepor Kal dyueivous Kat duvarwTepor mpdrrew 
oi diavov paivovrat, ot 5é dduKot oddev mparrew 
iC per adj Awy olot TE, dANa 5) Kal ovs dapev 
Eppwpevans mobmoré Te eT” aMa hav Kowy mpakar 
adikous ovras, Tobro ov mavramaciw dadnbés 
A€yopev: ov yap av direixovro adjov Kodi} 
ovTes dduKot, dAAa, SijAov ore eviv Tes abrots du- 
Kavoovvn, y) avrovs emrolet pjToL Kat d\AxjAous ye 
Kal ed’ ovs Heoav apa dduceiv, du’ nv émpakav 
a émpatav, cjoppnoav be ent TO. dduca adduct 
HpLyLoxXOnpor ovtes, eel ot ye TayiTrovnpoe kal 
D reAdws dducot Te€ws elol Kal mparrew ddvvarou 
Tada bev obv OTL OUTWs EXEL, pavOdven, aN’ ovx 
ds od 70 mpa@rov erifeco. «i S5é Kal dpeuvov 
(How ot dixao tv adikwv Kal eddayovéorepot 
elow, Omep TO VoTepov mpovléucba cKépacbar, 
oxemtéov. gaivovtar ev ovdv Kal viv, ws ye jot 
Soxe?, €€ Sv cipyjkapev: oums 8 ere BéAriov 
oKeTTEov. ov yap Tept 708 eTUTUXOVTOS 6 Adyos, 
GAA trept Tob ovrwva Tpdmrov xp Civ. LKdzree oy, 
ep. uKon®@, 7, oo eyes" Kat pou A€ye: SoKet ti 
E oo elvas immov epyov; “Epouye. *Ap’ obv totto 

@ For the idea cf. the argument in Protag. 327 c-p, that 
Socrates would yearn for the wickedness of Athens if he 
found himself among wild men who knew no justice at all. 

» The main ethical question of the Republic, suggested 
in 347 §, now recurs. 

° Similarly 578 c. What has been said implies that 
injustice is the corruption and disease of the soul (see on 
445 a-B). But Socrates wishes to make further use of the 
argument from épyor or specific function. 

4 Cf. on 344 v, supra, pp. 71 f. 

* See on 335 pv, and Aristot. Hth. Nic. i. 7. 14. The 

virtue or excellence of a thing is the right performance of 



the just appear to be wiser and better and more 
eapable of action and the unjust incapable of any 
common action, and that if we ever say that any 
men who are unjust have vigorously combined to 
put something over, our statement is not altogether 
true, for they would not have kept their hands from 
one another if they had been thoroughly unjust, but 
it is obvious that there was in them some justice 
which prevented them from wronging at the same 
time one another too as well as those whom they 
attacked; and by dint of this they accomplished 
whatever they did and set out to do injustice only 
half corrupted * by injustice, since utter rascals com- 
pletely unjust are completely incapable of effective 
action—all this I understand to be the truth, and 
not what you originally laid down. But whether it 
is also true ® that the just have a better life than the 
unjust and are happier, which is the question we 
afterwards proposed for examination, is what we 
now have to consider. It appears even now that _ 
they are, I think, from what has already been said. 
But all the same we must examine it more carefully.° 
For it is no ordinary * matter that we are discussing, 
but the right conduct of life.” ‘“‘ Proceed with your 
inquiry,” he said. “I proceed,” said I. “ Tell me 
then—would you say that a horse has a specific work ¢ 
or function?” “‘ I would.” “ Would you be willing 
its specific function. See Schmidt, Ethik der Griechen, i. 
p- 301, Newman, Introd. Aristot. Pol. p. 48. The following 
argument is in a sense a fallacy, since it relies on the double 
meaning of life, physical and moral (ef. 445 8 and Cratyl. 
399 pb) and on the ambiguity of «i tparrew, “ fare well” and 
* do well.” The Aristotelian commentator, Alexander, anim- 
adverts on the fallacy. For épyor ef. further Epictet. Dis. 
i. 4. 11, Max. Tyr. Dis. ii. 4, Musonius, apud Stob. 117. 8, 
Thompson on Meno 90 r, Plato, Laws 896 p, Phaedr. 246 8. 


nn (A 7 2 se \ IAA ¢ ~ ” 
av Geins Kat immov Kai addAov drovoby épyov, 
a ~ 
av 7) pdovw éexelvw movh tis 7) dpvora; Od pav- 
Oavw, edn. “AAN Bde: eof? Stw av GrAAw ‘Bors 
” a“ ~ 
7 opbadrpots; Od SAra. Ti S€; dxovaas aArAw 
* > / ] ~ ? ~ / bal ~ 
7 wow; Oddapds. Odxodv Sdixaiws dv tara 
tf al »” / , / 
tovTwy daipev epya elvar; Ilav ye. Ti 8; 
353 /, an” > / A > / ‘ ir 
faxatipa av ayurédov KAjwa amrotépous Kal opiAn 
a ~ , 
Kat dAXows zodAois; Ids yap ob; "AAX oddevi 
> ~ r ~ 
y av, olua, ovrw Kards, ws Speravm TH emt 
tobTo epyaobevt.. “AdnOA. *Ap’ odv od TodTo 
tovtov épyov Onoouev; Oroopuer pev ody. 
~ a“ 
XXIV. Nov 87, ola, dyewov av pabous 6 
apTt ypwTwy muvOavopevos, et od TobTO EKdOTOU 
ein Epyov, o av 7) povov tu 7) KdAAoTA Tov GAAwy 
amepyalnrar. "AXA, én, pavOdvw te Kai pot 
Bdoxet roiro éxdotov mpdypatos épyov elvat. 
Kiev, jv 8 éyd: odxobv Kal aper? SoKet cor elvar 
EKAOTW, TEP Kal Epyov TL mpooTéTaKTal; lwpev 
dé emi ta atta madw. ddbadudv, dapev, éorw 
epyov; “Eorw. *Ap’ odv Kai dper? odbaduadv 
” \ > / / / ” ” 
eotw; Kai aperyj. Ti 8€; wrwv hv te Epyov; 
Nai. Odxodv Kai dpetn; Kat dpern. Ti de 
"# / ~ v > o 4 
TavTwy méep. Tav aAAwy; ody ovtw; Odrw. 
” / s 3 LA »” A ¢ ~ A 
Exe 87: dp’ av more Gupata To atbrdv epyov 
C xadds amepydcawro pu Exovta THY adTav oikeiav 
> / > A \ ~ > ~ / K ‘ ~ wv 
apeTHv, add’ avTi Tijs aperijs xaxiay; Kat mds dv; 
edn: Tuproryra. yap tows Aéyets avri THs opews. 
"Hrs, qv 8 eyw, abrdv % apety od yap mw 


to define the work of a horse or of anything else to 
be that which one can do only with it or best with 
it?’ “I don’t understand,” he replied. “ Well, 
take it this way: is there anything else with which 
you can see except the eyes?” “ Certainly not.” 
“ Again, could you hear with anything but ears?” 
“By no means.” “‘ Would you not rightly say that 
these are the functions of these (organs)?”’ “ By all 
means.” “Once more, you could use a dirk to trim 
vine branches and a knife and many other instru- 
ments.” “‘ Certainly.” ‘But nothing so well, I take 
it, as a pruning-knife fashioned for this purpose.” 
“ That is true.” “ Must we not then assume this to 
be the work or function of that?” “ We must.” 
XXIV. “ You will now, then, I fancy, better appre- 
hend the meaning of my question when I asked whether 
that is not the work of a thing which it only or it better 
than anything else can perform.’’ “ Well,” he said, 
“ Ido understand, and agree that the work of anything 
is that.” ‘“‘ Very good,” said 1. “ Do you not also 
think that there is a specific virtue or excellence of 
everything for which a specific work or function is 
appointed? Let us return to the same examples. 
The eyes we say have a function?” “ They have.” 
“Ts there also a virtue of the eyes?” “ There is.” 
“ And was there not a function of the ears?’ “ Yes.” 
“ And so also a virtue?” “ Also a virtue.” “ And 
what of all other things? Is the case not the same?” 
“The same.” “Take note now. Could the eyes 
possibly fulfil their function well if they lacked their 
own proper excellence and had in its stead the 
defect?” “‘ How could they?” he said; “for I 
presume you meant blindness instead of vision.” 
“ Whatever,” said I, “ the excellence may be. For 



~ > ~ > > > ~ > / A > a“ 4 
tobTo pwd, ana el TH olxeig pev aperh 7d 
avdTa@v Epyov ed epydoeTar TA ‘epyatdoueva, Kakia. 
dé Kax@s. "AA bes, en, TOOTS ye Aéyets. Odxobv 
kal @Ta orepopeva THs abt&v aperhs Kax@s TO 
adtav eépyov amepydoera; Ildvy ye. Tiepev 

D odv kai taAAa ravra eis Tov adtov Adyov; “Epovye 
doxet. “16 57, pera’ Tabra, TOOE oneiau- puxfs €oTt 
Tt Epyov, 6 adAw TOV dvTwy ov” av évt mpagacs, 
olov TO roudvbe: TO emrehetobat kal dpxew kal 
BovAeveoOar Kal Ta Tovatra mavta, cof orm adAAw 

yuyh Sucaiws av atta damodotpev Kal daipev 
idua ekelvns elvat; Ovdevi GAAw. Ti 8 abd ro 
/ La > 

Civ; poxis pjoopev, epyov elvav; MdXtord y’, 
egy. Odxotv Kal aperyv pape Tia yuyts 

E eivac; Dapev. *Ap’ obv more, ® Opactpaxe, 
pox?) Ta abriis epya ed amepydceTat oTepomevyn 
Tis olxelas dperiis, 7 advvarov ; “Adwvarov. 
’AvdyKn dpa Kary buyy KaKds dpxew kal 
emyredetobar, Th de ayalh mavra TavTa <b 
mparrew. “Avayxyn. Odxodv aperny ye Evvexwpy 
capev puyts elvar duxacoovyvynv, Kakiav de aseiays 
Luvexwpnoapev yap. “H pev dpa dixaia pvyy 
Kat 0 Sdikavos avnp «bd PidoeTar, Kak@s b€ oO 
” / ” ‘ ‘ ‘ / 
aduxkos. Daivera, édyn, Kata Tov adv Adyov. 

354 °AAAa pny 6 ye eb (dv pakdpids Te Kai evdaipwv, 
¢ \ \ > / ~ \ ” ¢ A / 
6 6€ wy TavavrTia. [lds yap ot; ‘O pev dixauos 
»” > / ¢ > ” + ” 
dpa evdainwyv, 6 8 adiukos dOAvwos. “Eorwoar, 

* Platonic dialectic asks and affirms only so much as is 
needed for the present purpose. 

>’ For the equivocation ¢f. Charm. 172 a, Gorg. 507 ¢, 
Xen. Mem. iii. 9. 14, Aristot. Hth. Nic. 1098 b 21, Newman, 
Introd. Aristot. Pol. p. 401, Gomperz, Greek Thinkers 


usrce~ Vow“ nee oh rhe Zou \ 

m Xs rn ‘ 
4“ JOU 

I have not yet come? to that question, but am only 
asking whether whatever operates will not do its 
own work well by its own virtue and badly by its 
own defect.” “That much,” he said, “you may 
safely affirm to be true.” “Then the ears, too, if 
deprived of their own virtue will do their work ill?” 
* “And do we then apply the same 
principle to all things?” “I think so.” “ Then 
next consider this. The soul, has it a work which 
you couldn’t accomplish with anything else in the 
world, as for example, management, rule, delibera- 
tion, and the like, is there anything else than soul 
to which you could rightly assign these and say that 
they were its peculiar work ? ” “Nothing else.” 
life? Shall we _say-that-too—is- the 
function of the soul?” “* Most certainly,” he said. 
“ And do we not also say that there is an excellence 
or virtue of the soul?” “ Wedo.” “ Will the soul 
ever accomplish its own work well if deprived of 
its own virtue, or is this impossible?”’ “It is im- 
possible.” “Of necessity, then, a bad soul will 
govern and manage things badly while the good 
soul will in all these things do well.”” “Of necessity.” 
“ And did we not agree that the excellence or virtue 
of soul is justice and its defect injustice?”’ “ Yes, 
we did.” “The just soul and the just man then 
will live well and the unjust ill?” “‘ So it appears,” 
he said, “by your reasoning.” “ But furthermore, 
he who lives well is blessed and happy, and he who 
does not the contrary.” “Of course.” “Then the 
just is happy and the unjust miserable.” “So be 
(English ed.), ii. p. 70. It does not seriously affect the 
validity of the argument, for it is used only as a rhetorical 
confirmation of the implication that xaxés dpxeyr, etc.= 
misery and the reverse of happiness. 



edn. “AAG pv adOdAwv ye elvac od Avortedct, 
evdaiwova dé. lds yap ob; Ovddémor’ dpa, 
paxdpie Opactpaxe, AvoireAdotepov adikia de- 
kawoovrns. Tatra 37 aot, én, 2) LeKpares, 
etorudoBen ev tots Bevdidetous. ‘Yd ood Yes Hv 
& éeyd, @ Opactpaxe, emrevd7} phot mpaos eyévou 
Kal Xaremratven eratow. od pevrou Kadds ye 
ctoriapat, du” ewavtdv, add’ od dua ae: add’ womrep 
of Aixvot Tob ailet mapadepopévov azmoyevovrat 
apmalovres, mplv Tob mpotepov petpiws amoAataat, 
Kal €yw pot d0xK@ odtw, mplv 6 TO mp@Tov eaKko- 
Trobpev evpeiv, TO dixavov 6 ti mor’ eoTiv, dpépevos 
éxetvou OppAjoau emt TO oxépacbae mept adrod, 
etre Karta. ort Kal dyraBia eire copia Kal dpery, 
Kal é€umecdvtTos ad votepov Adyou, Ott Avotrede- 
aTepov 7 dd.ikia Ths Sixavootvns, ovK ameoxounV 
TO }A7) ovK emi Tobro ebciv am éxelvov, WaTE [ot 
voi yéeyovev €k Tod Siadoyou pndev eidevat: 
onde yap TO Sikatov HA) olda 6 €OTL, oxoAy 
etoopat etre dperi} TUS ovoa Tuyxdvel Eire Kal 
ov, Kal métepov 6 exwv adTo odK evdaimwy €eoTiv 
7 evdaipwvr. 

* For similar irony cf. Gorg. 489 p, Huthydem. 304 c. 

> Similarly Holmes (Poet at the Breakfast Table, p. 108) 
of the poet: ‘* He takes a bite out of the sunny side of this 
and the other, and ever stimulated and never satisfied,” etc. 
Cf. Lucian, Demosth. Encom. 18, Julian, Orat. ii. p. 69 ¢, 
Polyb. iii. 57. 7. 



it,” he said. “ But it surely does not pay to be 
miserable, but to be happy.” “Of course not.” 
“ Never, then, most worshipful Thrasymachus, can 
injustice be more profitable than justice.” “ Let this 
complete your entertainment, Socrates, at the festival 
of Bendis.” ‘“‘A feast furnished by you, Thrasy- 
machus,’’ I said, “ now that you have become gentle 
with me and are no longer angry.* I have not dined 
well, however—by my own fault, not yours. But just 
as gluttons ® snatch at every dish that is handed along 
and taste it before they have properly enjoyed the 

ing, so I, methinks, before finding the first 
object of our inquiry—what justice is—let go of that 
and set out to consider something about it, namely 
whether it is vice and ignorance or wisdom and virtue ; 
and again, when later the view was sprung upon us 
that injustice is more profitable than justice I could 
not refrain from turning to that from the other topic. 
So that for me the present outcome of the discussion ¢ 
is that I know nothing.* For if I don’t know what 
the just is,* I shall hardly know whether it is a virtue 
or not, and whether its possessor is or is not happy.” 

* Hirzel, Der Dialog >i. p. 4, n. 1, argues that d:addyou 
here means “inquiry ” (Hrérterung), not the dialogue with 

* For the profession of ignorance at the close of a Socratic 
dialogue cf. Charm. 175 a-n, Lysis 222 p-£, Protag. 361 a-, 
Xen. Mem. iv. 2.39. Cf. also Introd. p. x. 

* Knowledge of the essence, or definition, must precede 
discussion of qualities and relations. Cf. Meno 71 8, 86 p-s, 
Laches 190 8, Gorg. 448 E. 



> ‘ A > ~ > \ ” , 
357 I. ’Eya pev odv tadra cindy w@pynv Adyov 

> / 4 > »” e ” , 
amnAAdxGa: ro 8 Hv dpa, Ws EouKe, mpooiuov. 
6 yap TAadcwv det te dvdpedtatos Mv Tuyxaver 
m™pos amavra, Kai 57) Kal Tote TOO Opacvpdyov 
Thv amdoppnow ovK amedéEato, ad edn: 7Q. 
Ldbkpates, woTepov Huds BovAe Soxeiv memeikévar 
Bi ws adAnbds meioa, Ste mavti Tpomw apewov 
€ott Sikavov elvar 7 adikov; ‘Qs adAnOds, elmov, 

” > nn ¢ , > EE] > \ ” > , 
éywy av édoiunv, «i em’ euoi ein. Od roivur, 
” al “a , / / / a 
edn, mrovets 6 BovAn. A€ye ydp por dpd cor Soxet 
/ > , “a , Pe ” > 
Toudvoe Tt elvar ayabov, 6 SeLaine” av Exew ov 
~ > /, > , > > > A e ~ 
T&v amoBawdvrwy edrewevor, adr’ adro adrov 
évexa domalduevor; olov ro yxaipew Kal ai 

¢€ ‘ hd > ~ \ de > \ ” 
Hdoval doar aBAaBeis Kat pndev eis Tov emerta 

/ A U4 / ” a” / ” 

xpovov dia Tavras ylyverar dAdo 7 yalpew ExovTa. 

* Soin Philebus 11 c, Philebus cries off or throws up the 
sponge in the argument. 

» Aristotle borrows this classification from Plato (Topics 
118 b 20-22), but liking to differ from his teacher, says in 
one place that the good which is desired solely for itself is the 
highest. The Stoics apply the classification to ‘* preferables ” 
(Diog. Laert. vii. 107). Cf. Hooker, Eccles. Pol. i. 11. 
Elsewhere Plato distinguishes goods of the soul, of the body, 



I. When I had said this 1 supposed that I was done 
with the subject, but it all turned out to be only a 
prelude. For Glaucon, who is always an intrepid, 
enterprising spirit in everything, would not on 
occasion acquiesce in Thrasymachus’s abandonment 4 
of his case, but said, “ Socrates, is it your desire to 
seem to have persuaded us or really to persuade us 
that it is without exception better to be just than 
unjust?” “Really,” I said, “if the choice rested 
with me.” “ Well, then, you are not doing what you 
wish. For tell me: do you agree that there is a 
kind of good ® which we would choose to possess, not 
from desire for its after effects, but welcoming it for 
itsownsake? As, for example, joy and such pleasures 
as are harmless¢ and nothing results from them after- 
wards save to have and to hold the enjoyment.” “I 

and oD sogacommeng (Laws 697 3B, 727-729) or as the first 
Alcibiad: nets it (131) the self, the things of the self, and 

© Plato speaks of harmless pleasures, from the point 
of view of common sense and prudential morality. Cf. Tim. 
59 D duerapéAnror jAdoviv, Milton’s 
Mirth that after no repenting draws. 
But the Republic (583 p) like the Gorgias (493 £-494.c) knows 
the more technical distinction of the Philebus (42 c ff., 53 c ff.) 

between pure pleasures and impure, which are conditioned 
by desire and pain. 



C”Epouye, Fv 8 eyed, Soxet te elvar tovodrov. Ti 



dé; 0 adro re abtod ydpw ayardpyev Kal Tov 
am avtod yvyvouévwy; olov ad To dpoveiv Kal 
TO Opav Kal TO byvaivews Ta yap Tovadra mov Ov 
> / > / / / \ 
dpporepa domraldueba. Nat, elmov. Tpitov de 
opas Th, edn, eldos ayalod, ev & 70 yopralecbar 
Kal 70 KaLvovTa tarpeveoBat kal idrpevats TE 
Kal 6 GAXos xpynpaticpds; Tatra yap eémimova 
daipev av, whedrciv dé jhuds, Kal adra pev €avTa@v 
ov ? an / ” ~ \ ~ 

evexa ovK av de€aineda eyew, TOV S€ picbdv Te 

/, ‘ ~ Ld ¢ / 2 ~ 
xdpw Kal t&v adAAwv doa yiyverar am’ adbrar. 
” A > ” ‘ ~ / > A / 
Eort yap obv, édnv, kal todro tpirov. adda Ti 
dy; °Ev Trot, ey, Touro THY Sixaroodvny 
riOns ; ‘ "Eye pev oljat, Hv o ey, ev TO KadNiore, 
6 Kal bu adTo Kal dua Ta yeyvopeva am avrobd 
ayarnréov T@ pédAovtt praxapiw eoecba. Ov 
towuv Soxel, fn, Tots 7oAXots, aAAd TOO emumdvou 

” ry) a pe \ > a : Al 
eldous, 6 pucddv & vera Kal evdoKipnoewy dia 

/ > ig dead § \ > iS. ae / 
ddgav émitndevtéov, adro dé di adto devKréov 
Ws ov xarerov. 

II. Oida, jv 8 eyo, OTU Soxet ovuTw, Kal maAaL 
bro Opacvpdxou os Tovobrov ov péyerar, ddikia 5° 
emrawetrat’: aAd’ eyed Tis, ws Eouxe, Ovapabys. “1A 

la ” »” \ > lol p BLA > a a 
57, €fn, akovoov Kal éeuob, edv cot Tatra Sox. 
Opacvpaxos yap pot paiverat mpwuatrepov ob 
S€ovtos U0 aod Worep odis KHANnOAVaL, ewot dé 

1 Géuxia 8 émawetrac A omits. 

* Isoe. i. 47 has this distinction, as well as Aristotle. 

» Some philosophers, as Aristippus (Diog. Laert. x. 1. 138), 
said that intelligence is a good only for its consequences, but 
the opening sentences of Aristotle’s Metaphysics treat all 
forms of knowledge as goods in themselves. 


“heal . >. Ys \ 
Goods - iv areas wk Py, J nvee- 

recognize that kind,” said I. “‘ And again a kind that 
we love both for its own sake and for its consequences,” 
such as understanding,” sight, and health?* For these 
I presume we welcome for both reasons.” ‘‘ Yes,” 
I said. “ And can you discern a third form of good 
under which falls exercise and being healed when 
sick and the art of healing and the making of money 
generally? For of them we would say that they are 
laborious and painful yet beneficial, and for their 
own sake we would not accept them, but only-for the 
rewards and other benefits that accrue from them.” 
““Why yes,” I said, “I must admit this third class 
also. But what of it?’’ “ In which of these classes 
do you place justice ?”’ he said. “In my opinion, 
I said, “ it belongs in the fairest class, that which a 
man who is to be happy must love both for its own 
‘sake and for the results.” ‘‘ Yet the multitude,” he 
said, “do not think so, but that_it_belongs to the 
toilsome class of things that must be-practised for 
the sake of rewards and repute due to opinion but 
that in itself is to be shunned as an affliction.” 

Il. “T am aware,” said I, “ that that is the general 
opinion and Thrasymachus has for some time been 
disparaging it as such and praising injustice. But I, 
it seems, am somewhat slow to learn.” “Come 
now, he said, “ hear what I too have to say and see 
if you agree with me. For Thrasymachus seems to 
me to have given up to you too soon, as if he were a 
serpent? that you had charmed, but I am not yet satis- 

© Plutarch (1040 c) says that Chrysippus censured Plato 
for recognizing health as a good, but elsewhere Plato ex- 
plicitly says that even health is to be disregarded when the 
true interests of the soul require it. 

# For Plato’s fondness for the idea of «nde ef. The Unity 
of Plato’s Thought, note 500. 



” ‘ ~ ae /, /, +e ai 
ovmw KaTa vodv 7) amddekts yéyove Trept Exatépov* 
erOvup@ yap axodoat, tit’ €oTw éxdrepov Kal Tiva 
” , a7. % > CN Fe Oe > a” = ‘ 
exer SUvayuv adro Kal” adro evov ev TH pvyt, Tods 
dé pucbods Kal Ta yryvopueva am’ adr@v edoar xat- 
pew. ovTwat odv moujow, é€av Kal Gol doKh: ém- 

C avavewoopuat Tov Opacvudxov Adyov, Kal mp@rov 
pev ep Sixaoavyyy ofov elvai pact Kai dbev yeyo- 
vévat: Sevrepov dé Stu mavTEs adTO of emiTNdSevovTEs 
»” > , ¢ > a > > > ¢ 
akovres emitndevovow ws avayKatov add’ ody as 
> / , A Ld > / > \ ~ 4 
ayabov: tpirov dé ote eixdtws adrd SpHau- odd 
yap aycivwv dpa 6 Tob adixov 7 6 Tod SiKaiov 
Bios, ws Aéyovow. emei Ewouye, & LwKpares, ove 
Soxet oTws: atop pévro. dvatePpvAnpévos ta 
> > , , \ , ” \ 
Ota, dkovwv Opacvudaxyouv Kal pvpiwy adAwv, Tov 

D 3€ brép Tis Suxavoadyyns Adyov, ws apewvov adukias, 

> / > / ¢ 4 4, \ 
ovdevds mw aKkyikoa ws BovdAopar- BovAopar dé 
avro Kal?’ airo éykwpualduevov akodoa. pddora 
8 oluar av cob mvbécba- 10 Karateivas ép® tov 
»” , > a > A \ > , , a“ 
adixov Biov erawav, eimmv dé evdeiEouat cor, dv 
tporov ad BovAouwar Kat cod aKkovew ad.iKiay prev 

/ 4 \ > ~ > 7S 
wéyovtos, Suxatoovvynv dé exawobdvTos. GAN dpa, 
et aot Bovropevw & réyw. Ildvtwv pddvora, Fv 

ES éydé: mepi yap tivos av paAdov mrodAdKis tis 

~ ” ‘ / \ > , 4 
voov éxwv xalpor Aéywv Kat axovwv; KdAdora, 
edn, A€yeis* Kal O mp@tov edyv Epeiv, Epi TovTov 

* Of. infra 366 E. 

® Cf. supra 347 c-p. 

¢ Cf. Phileb. 66 ©. Plato affirms that the immoralism of 
Thrasymachus and Callicles was widespread in Greece. Cf. 



fied with the proof that has been offered about justice 
and injustice. For what I desire is to hear what 

the argument of Thrasymachus and will first state 
what men say is the nature and origin of justice ; 
secondly, that all who practise it do so reluctantly, 
regarding it as something necessary? and not as a 
good; and thirdly, that they have plausible grounds 
for thus acting, since forsooth the life of the unjust 
man is far better than that of the just _man—as 

they say sGhough 1; Sueratet fom’ heliers iD Yet 
I am disc when my ears are dinned by 
the arguments of Thrasymachus and innumerable 
others.° But the case for justice, to prove that 
it is better than injustice, I have never yet heard 
stated by any as I desire to hear it. What I desire 
is to hear an encomium on justice in and by 
itself. And I think I am most likely to get that 
from you. For which reason I will lay myself out 
in praise of the life of injustice, and in so speaking 
will give you an example of the manner in which I 
desire to hear from you in turn the dispraise of 
injustice and the praise of justice. Consider whether 
my proposal pleases you.” “ Nothing could please 
me more,’ said I; “for on what subject would a man 
of sense rather delight-to hold and_hear discourse 
again and again?” “That is excellent,’’ he said ; 
“ and now listen to what I said would be the first topic 

Introd. x-xi, and Gorg. 5118, Protag. 333 c, Euthydem. 
279 w, and my paper on the interpretation of the Timaeus, 
A.J.P. vol. ix. pp. 403-404. 

VOL. I I 113 


dkove, oldv ré TU Kat bev yéyove Sixavoovvn. 
medukevar yap 87 pao TO pev aduceiv ayabov, Td 
be adiKetobar KaKov, méove d€ KaKa® _DrrepBa ew 
TO aduKetobar 7 dyad TO GdLKeiv, aor’ €7TELOaV 
aAAjAous adikat te Kal dducOvrat Kal audotépwv 
yevavrat, tots py) Suvapevors TO pev expedyeuw 
359 To dé alpeiv Soxet Avoitedciv §vvbécbat EMifrors 
par dducety pyr aducetobar. Kal evredbev 5 
dpEacbar vopous rieobat Kal EvvOjKas abrav, 
Kal dvopdoar TO bad Tob vopov erritayLa. vOpLuLov 
Te Kal dixatov, Kal elvae 57) Tavrny yeveoty TE Kat 
ovotay Suxauoovyns, perako oveav Tod pev dpiorov 
OvTos, €av adiK@v pr 88@ Sixynv, Tod dé KakioTou, 
€dv aduxovpevos Tyswpeicbar advvaros 7, TO de 
dixavov ev péow dv TovTwv audotépwv ayardobat 
Bovy ws ayabdv, aX os dppwotia Tob adviKeiv 
TiLwpevov* ere TOV Suvdpevov avTo Toveiv Kal ws 
adnbas avd pa ove ay évi mote Evvbécbau 70 pyre 
aucety pyre adcxetobar: paiveoBat yap av. 
juev ov 57) puous Sucatoovyns, @ LesKpares, abrn 
Te Kal TowavTyn, Kal e€ dv mépuKe Towadra, ws oO 
III. ‘Qs dé Kal of emuTnbevovres dduvapia Tob 
aduKeiv doves adTo émiT7devovot, pdAvor” av 
aicboiucba, «i towvde Toijoayev TH Swavoia: 

1 +i oidy te Dy 

@ Glaucon employs the antithesis between nature and law 
and the theory of an original social contract to expound the 
doctrine of Thrasymachus and Callicles in the Gorgias. His 
statement is more systematic than theirs, but the principle is 
the same; for, though Callicles does not explicitly speak of a 



—the nature and origin of justice. By nature,* they 
say, to commit injustice is a good and to suffer it is 
an evil, but that the excess of evil in being wronged 
is greater than the excess of good in doing wrong. 
So_that when Ne ee and oe by one 
another and taste of both, those who lack the power 
to ayoid the one and-take the other determine that 
it is for their profit to make a compact with one another 

neither to commit nor to suffer injustice ; and that 
this is the beginning of législation and of covenants 

between men, and that they name the commandment 
of the law the lawful-and-the just, andthat-this is 
the is and_essential_nature_of justice—a com- 

promise between the best, which is to do wrong with 
impunity, and the worst, which is to be wronged and 
be impotent to get one’s revenge. Justice, they tell 
us, being mid-way between the two, is accepted and | 
approved, not as a real good, but as a thing honoured 
in the lack of vigour to do injustice, since anyone 
who had the power to do it and was in reality 
“a man’ would never make a compact with anybody 
neither to wrong nor to be wronged ; for he would 
be mad. The nature, then, of justice is this and such 
as this, Socrates, and such are the conditions in 
which it originates, according to the theory. 

III. “ But as for the second point, that those who 
practise it do so unwillingly and from want of power to 
commit injustice—we shall be most likely to appre- 
hend that if we entertain some such supposition as 

social contract, he implies that conventional justice is an 

ment of the weak devised to hold the strong in awe 
(Gorg. 492 c), and Glaucon here affirms that no really strong 
man would enter into any such agreement. The social 
contract without the immoral application is also suggested 
in Protag. 322 8. Cf. also Crito 50 ¢, f. 



C ddvres e€ovolay Exarépw moveiv 6 te Gv BovAnrat, 
~ / ‘ An 2Q7 t Mee / 
T® Te Sixaiw Kal TH adixw, eit’ eémaxoAovOynoa- 
prev Dedpevor, trot 7 emBvpia éxdrepov afer. én” 
> 4 > / ” ‘ / ~ 2Q7 
adtopwpw obv AdBowev av Tov Sixatov T@ adikw 
eis tadrov idvra bia Tv mAcovegiav, 6 aca dats 
duidkew mrédpuxev ws ayablov, vouw S€ Bia map- 
dyerat él tiv Tod icov Tyunv. etn 8’ av 7 eovoia 
nv Aéyw toudde pddvora, et adbtois yévoito olay 
/ 4, ~ , ~ “A / 
mote pact Svvayw TH Tvyov tod Avdod a, 
D , d as eae es \ _ : POYeE? 
yeveobar. elvar pev yap adrov mroyseva OntevovTa 
\ ~ / / * ” \ lol 
mapa T@ TOTe Avdias apxovTt, duBpov Sé modob 
yevouevov Kal ceiopod payhval tT THs yhs Kal 
yevéobar xdopa Kata TOV ToTov H evewev> idovTa 
d€ Kai Javpacavra KaraPivar, Kal idetv adda Te 
87) pvoroyoto. Oavpacra Kal immov xadkodv 
a i ” > «a > 4 > ~ 
KotAov, Oupidas exovta, Kal? as éeyxibavta ideiv 
evovTa vekpov, ws daiverba, peilw 7 Kar 
E av@pwrov, tobrov S€ ado pev oddev,’ wept dé TH 
xEtpt xpvaobv SaxtvAvov, dv mrepteAopevov exBHvat. 
avAddyou Sێ yevouevou tots mouseow eiwbdros, 
o> 3 / ‘ a 1 ~ a A ‘ A 
ww’ e€ayyeAdouev Kata piva’ T@ Bacire? ra epi Ta 
1 dd\Xo wey otdéyv A; the translation tries to preserve the 

idiomatic ambiguity of the text: éew otdé& of Il would 
explicitly affirm the nakedness of the corpse. 

@ The antithesis of @ic:s and vdéuos, nature and law, custom 
or convention, is a commonplace of both Greek rhetoric and 
Greek ethics. Cf. the Chicago Dissertation of John Walter 
Beardslee, The Use of dicts in Fifth Century Greek Liter- 
ature, ch. x. p. 68. Cf. Herod. iii. 38, Pindar, quoted by 
Plato, Gorg. 484 8, Laws 690 8. 715 a; Euripides or Critias, 
Frag. of Sisyphus, Aristoph. Birds 755 ff., Plato, Protag. 
337 p, Gorg. 483 ©, Laws 889 cand 890 pv. It was misused 
by ancient as it is by modern radicals. Cf. my interpretation 
of the Timaeus, A.J.P. vol. ix. p. 405. The ingenuity of 



this in thought : if we grant to each, the just and the 
unjust, licence and power to do whatever he pleases, 
and then accompany them in imagination and see 
whither his desire will conduct each. We should then 
catch the just man in the very act of resorting to the 
same conduct as the unjust man because of the self- 
advantage which every creature by its nature pursues 
as a good, while by the convention of law ¢ it is forcibly 
diverted to paying honour to‘ equality.’® The licence 
that I mean would be most nearly such as would result 
from supposing them to have the power which men say 
once came to the ancestor of Gyges the Lydian.¢ They 
relate that he was a shepherd in the service of the ruler 
at that time of Lydia, and that after a great deluge of 
rain and an earthquake the ground opened andachasm 
appeared in the place where he was pasturing ; and 
they say that he saw and wondered and went down 
into the chasm; and the story goes that he beheld 
other marvels there and a hollow bronze horse with 
little doors, and that he peeped in and saw a corpse 
within, as it seemed, of more than mortal stature, 
and that there was nothing else but a gold ring on 
its hand, which he took off and went forth. And 
when the shepherds held their customary assembly 
to make their monthly report to the king about the 

modern philologians has tried to classify the Greek sophists 
as distinctly partisans of véuos or dicts. It cannot be done. 
Cf. my unsigned review of Alfred Benn in the New York 

ation, July 20, 1899, p. 57. > Cf. Gorg. 508 a. 

* So manuscripts and Proclus. There are many emenda- 
tions which the curious will find in Adam’s first appendix to 
this book. Herod. i. 8-13 tells a similar but not identical 
story of Gyges himself, in which the magic ring and many 
other points of Plato’s tale are lacking. On the whole 
legend ef. the study of Kirby Flower Sinith, A.J.P. vol. 
xxiii. pp. 261-282, 361-387, and Frazer’s Paus. iii. p. 417. 



, > : 6. ee ee ” ‘ $ : , 
mroiuvia, adikéobar Kai exetvov €xovta Tov SaKTv- 
Awov. Kabypevov obv peta TOV adAwv tvyetv THY 
aodevdovnv Tod SaxrvAiov TepiayayovTa mpos éav- 

\ a / 4, 
Tov els TO €low THs xeLpds* ToUTOU Se yevopevou 
360 adavh adrov yevéobar rots tapaxabnpevois, Kal 

diaréyeobar ws epi oiyouevov. Kat Tov Javydlew 
Te Kal mdAw exupmrapavra Tov daxTvAvov orperbas 
e€w TV opevdorny, | kal oTpeavta avepov ye~ 
véo0ar. Kai Todro evvoroavra drromreupacBa Too 
SaxrvAiov, ef tadrnv exor THY S¥vaywv, Kal adTa@ 
a / , \ ” A ‘ 
ottw EvuBaivew, orpépovte pev elow thy odev- 
Sdvynv adnrlw yiyvecbau, ew Se SiAw. aicbd- 
\ 29\ / ~ > / / 
prevov de edOds Siampdtacba Tov ayyéAwy yeve- 
~ ‘ ‘ , > , A \ \ 
Boda tv mapa tov Baciréa: eAPovta S€ Kal Tiv 
yuvaika avtTod potxedvoavTa, pet ekeivns eémt- 

, ~ a > cal \ A > \ 
Oéwevov TO Baorhet dmoKreivan Kat THY GpxnY Kara 
oxeiv. ef ody do Towotrtw daxtvAiw yevoicbnr, 
Kal Tov pev 6 Sikatos mepiHeiro, Tov Sé 6 ad.KOs, 

SIA, Aye HAA , € , ¢ > , 
obdeis av yévoito, ws Sd€evev, oUTwWs adapavTwos, 
Os dv petvecev ev TH dixatcootvyn Kal ToAunoevev 
SIT, a > , \ y © 2e\ 
anéxecbar t&v aAAotpiwy Kat py amtecba, ov 
avT@ Kal eK THs ayopds adeds 6 tt BovAotto Aap- 
C Bavew, Kat eiowdvre eis Tas oikias ovyyiyvecba 
6tw BovAovro, Kal amoKxtwvivar Kai eK Seapudv 
rig A / \ ap / > 
Avew ovotwas BovAotto, Kal TadAAa mpadtrew ev 

A > Z > / + 4 A ~ x04 
tois avOpurrois iadfeov ovta. ovTw de Spdv ovdev 
a“ / ~ ¢ / a > > aS b} A 
dv dSuddopov tod érépov mot, add’ emi tadrov 
lovey GppoTepor. KaiTor péya TOOTO TEK[ULApLOV av 

@ Mr. H. G. Wells’ The Invisible Man rests on a similar 
fancy. Cf. also the lawless fancies of Aristoph. Birds 785 ff, 


ys ee adr gs) | 4 wate e 
ant the. Pp te 


i Ho bhes Kru ssa 

flocks, he also attended wearing the ring. So as he 

sat there it chanced that he turned the collet of the 

ring towards himself, towards the inner part of his 

hand, and when this took place they say that he 

became invisible * to those who sat by him and they 

spoke of him as absent; and that he was amazed, 

and again fumbling with the ring turned the collet 

outwards and so became visible. On noting this he 

experimented with the ring to see if it possessed 

this virtue, and he found the result to be that when he 

turned the collet inwards he became invisible, and 

when outwards visible ; and becoming aware of this, 

he immediately managed things so that he became 

one of the messengers who went up to the king, and 

on coming there he seduced the king’s wife and with 

her aid set upon the king and slew him and possessed 

his kingdom. If now there should be two such rings, 

and the just man should put on one and the unjust 

the other, no one could be found, it would seem, of 

such adamantine® temper as to persevere in justice 

and endure to refrain his hands from the possessions 

of others and not touch them, though he might with 

impunity take what he wished even from the market- 

place, and enter into houses and lie with whom he 

pleased, and slay and loose from bonds whomsoever 

ki € equal of a god. 
acting he would do no differently fromr the other man, 
but both would pursue the same course. And yet 

» The word is used of the firmness of moral faith in Gorg. 
509 a and Rep. 618 er. 

© icé@eos. The word is a leit-motif anticipating Plato's 
rebuke of the tragedians for their pane of the tyrant. Cf. 

in 568 4-8. It does not, as Adam suggests, foreshadow 
Plato’s attack on the popular theology. 



dain tis, OTe ovdels Exar dSixatos GAN avayKald- 
pevos, Ws ovK ayabod idia dvros, émel Smov yy av 
olnras exaotos olds te eocobar adueiv, adiKety. 
D Avorredciv yap 81) olerar Gs avip odd padAov 
idia thy adixiay THs Sixaoadvys, aAnOA oidpevos, 
ws dycet 6 mept Tob TotovTov Adyou Aێywv- ezet 
el Tis Tovadtns e€ovoias émAaBdopevos pundév Tote 
eOdror. ~adiuKfjoa pnde abarto tv aAdoTpiwv, 
aOAubtatos pev av dd€evev elvar tots aicbavo- 
pevots Kad dvontoraros, errawotev 8 av avrov 
aAArAcov evavTiov efamaravres aAnAous Sua TOV 
Tob dduKketobat PoBov. TabTo _Hev obv 87) ovTws. 
E Ky Thy d€ Kplow adrHy rob Biov wépe civ Aéyo- 
HEV, €av Siacrnowpeba Tov TE OiKaLdTaTOV Kal 
TOV dduccsTarov, oiol 7 éodpeba Kpivat dpOds- «it 
dé uy, ov. tis obv 81) 7 Sudoraots; mOe* pndev 
adaipOpev pyre Tod adikov amo Tis dduntlig) parE 
Tob Sucatov dro Tis Suxauoodyys, aAAa tédeov 
ExdTEpov eis TO éavTod emiTOEvpLa TU Gpev. 
mp@rov pev obdv 6 GdiKos womTrEp ot Sewol , Onpevoup- 
yot moveirw: ofov KuBepvijrns dicpos ) latpos Ta 
TE ddvvara ev TH TEXYN Kal Ta duvara diaroba- 
361 veTat. Kal Tots pev emuxetpel, Ta dé €G, ere de 
éav dpa 7 opadh, ixavos érravopboicbai ouTw 
Kal o dducos emixetp@v opbds tots dducjpace 
AavOavéerw, ef péAdcc odddpa adiKos elvat: Tov 

* Cf. supra 344 a, Gorg. 492 B. 

> aicbavouévots suggests men of discernment who are not 
taken in by phrases, “ the knowing ones.” Cf. Protag. 317 a, 
and Aristoph. Clouds 1241 rots eidédow, 

© Of. Gorg. 483 8, 492 a, Protag. 327 B, Aristot. Rhet. ii. 23, 

4 Cf. infra 580 B-c, Phileb. 27 ¢. 


‘susXsce so ag wie tev ey expecie 4 

. this is a great proof, one might argue, that no one 
is just of his own will but only from constraint, in the | 
belief that justice is not his personal good, inasmuch 
as every man, when he supposes himself to have the 
power to do wrong, does wrong. For that there is 
far more profit for him personally in injustice than 
in justice is what every man believes, and believes 
truly, as the proponent of this theory will maintain. 
For if anyone who had got such a licence within his 
grasp should refuse to do any wrong or lay his hands 
on others’ possessions, he would be regarded as most 
pitiable ¢ and a great fool by all who took note of it,? 
though they would praise him ° before one another’s 
faces, deceiving one another because of their fear 
of suffering injustice. So much for this point. -_ 
IV. “But to come now to the decision? between our 
two kinds of life, if we separate the most completely 
just and the most completely unjust man, we shall 
be able to decide rightly, but if not, not. How, then, 
is this separation to bs made? Thus: we must 
subtract nothing of his injustice from the unjust man 
or of his justice from the just, but assume the per- 
fection of each in his own mode of conduct. In the 
first place, the unjust man must act as clever crafts- 
men do: a first-rate pilot or physician, for example, 
feels the difference between impossibilities® and 
possibilities in his art and attempts the one and lets 
the others go; and then, too, if he does happen to 
trip, he is equal to correcting his error. Similarly, 
the unjust man who attempts injustice rightly must 
be supposed to escape detection if he is to be alto- 
gether unjust, and we must regard the man who is 

* Cf. Quint. iv. 5. 17 “recte enim Graeci praecipiunt 
non tentanda quae effici omnino non possint.” 



ddoxdpevov Sé daddov iynréov eaxaTn yap 
ddixta Soxeiv Sikauov elvau pur) Ovta. Soréov ov 
T®@ Ter€ws adikw THY tehewrarqy aduxiav, Kal 
ovK apaiperéov, dW éaréov 7a peytora dduKodv- 
Ta THY peylorny ddfav avT@ TApEckevaKevat eis 
B duxavocdvnv, Kat e€av dpa oddMnrat Th, émay- 
opfotcba duvaT® elvar, Aéyew re ixav@ ovte mpos 
To meiOew, eav a Envinra TOV aducndtwv, Kal 
Bidoacba 6 dca av Bias denrat, dud Te dvdpetav ral 
poopy Kat dud. Tapackevny dilwy Kal ovoias. 
Todrov 5€ tovodrov Oévres Tov Sixatov map avrov 
toTOpev TO AOyw, avdpa amAobv Kat yevvaiov, 
kat’ AioxvAov od Soxeiv add’ elvar dyaborv ebdAovta. 
adaipetéov 87) 7d doxeiv. €f yap Sdfer dikatos 
Cecivar, eoovrar adT@ tial Kai Swpeat SoKxodvte 
tovovtw elvar- adnrov odv, elre Tod Sixaiov eire 
Tov Swpedv te Kal Tys@v evexa Tovwwodros «tn. 
yupvatéos 81) mavtwv mAjv dSikaootvns, Kal 
TounTéos evavrTiws Svaxetpevos TO Tporepy’ pndev 4 
yap adikav dd€av €XETO | THY peyloTny dduxias, 
iva BeBacaropevos els Sixaroovyay TD 41) 
téyyeobar bd KaKodokgias Kal TOv am adbris y- 
yronevwy: GAN irw dpetdotatos péxpt Gavarov, 
D do0xdv péev elvar adikos bia Biov, dv Sé dixatos, 
iv’ auddrepor eis TO Eoxatov eAndAvOdtes, 6 pev 

« Cf. Emerson, Eloquence: “Yet any swindlers we have 
known are novices and bunglers. ... A greater power of 
face would accomplish anything sand with the rest of the 
takings take away the bad name.” 

> Cf. Cic. De offic. i. 13. 



caught asa bungler.* For the height of injustice ® is 
to seem just without being so. To the perfectly 
unjust man, then, we must assign perfect injustice 
and withhold nothing of it, but we must allow him, 
while committing the greatest wrongs, to have 
secured for himself the greatest reputation for justice; 
and if he does happen to trip,° we must concede to 
him the power to-correct his mistakes by his ability 
to uasively if any of his misdeeds come to 
light, and when force is needed, to employ force by 
reason of his manly spirit and vigour and his provision 
of friends and money ; and when we have set up an 
unjust man of this character, our theory must set 
the just man at his side—a simple and noble man, 
who, in the phrase of Aeschylus, does not wish to 
seem but be good. Then we must deprive him 
of the seeming.’ For if he is going to be thought 
just he will have honours and gifts because of that 
esteem. We cannot be sure in that case whether 
he is just for justice’ sake or for the sake of the 
gifts and the honours. So we must strip him bare 
of everything but justice and make his state the 
opposite of hisimagined counterpart. Though doing 
no wrong he must have the repute of the greatest 
injustice, so that he may be put to the test as regards 
justice through not softening because of ill repute 
and the consequences thereof. But let him hold on 
his course unchangeable even unto death, seeming 
all his life to be unjust though being just, that so, 
both men attaining to the limit, the one of injustice, 

¢ Cf. Thucyd. viii. 24 on the miscalculation of the shrewd 

# As Aristotle sententiously says, dpos 5¢ ro rpds SéEar 8 

havOavew wédwy od dv Eorro (Rhet. 1365 b 1, Topics iii. 3. 14). 
* For the thought cf. Eurip. Hel. 270-271. 


_ nae 





Sixacoovvys, 6 b€ ddicias, KpivwrTar dmdTEpos 
avrotv eddaupoveorepos. 

V. BaBac, my 8” eyes, @ dire Draven, as 
Eppapevos exdrepov Womrep dvSpuavra els 77) 
Kptow exxabatpers TOU dvSpoiv. ‘Qs padvor’, en, 
Sdvapar. dvrTow S€ Towodrow, oddev ETL, WS ey@- 
pra, xXarerov eme€eeiv TO Aoyw, olos _eKdrepov 
Bios ETTULEVEL. Aekréov ob kat 87) Kav poe 
Kotépws Adynrat, pu) ee otov Aéyeuw, o Lo- 
Kpares, dAAd TOUS emawobvras 7po duKkaroavvns 
dduxiav. epoda. d¢ tdde, OTe ovTw SiaKetpevos 
6 dikatos waoTvywoeTaL, onpeBldcernt, ded7joera0, 
exxavOjnoerar THPpOadAue, TedevTav Tara, Kad 
Tabav davacxwdvAev0jcerar, Kal yvwoeTat, drt 
ovK elvar dSixavov adda Boney Set eOédew> TO be 
tod Aioytdov mod Hv a, dpa opborepov Aéyew Kara 
Tob adixov. TH dvTe yap pjcover Tov ddicov, a are 
émuTndevovra mpaywa adn Betas exopevov Kat ot 
mpos Sd€av Lavra, od Soxeiv dducov add’ elvas 

Babciay droxa dia Ppevds Kaprrovpevor, 

e€ Hs ta Kedva BAaoraver BovAcduata, 
mpGrov peev dpxewv ev TH moAc SoKxobvre SiKaiw 
clvat, erevra yapeiv omdbev av BovAnrat, exSiSdva 
ets ovs av BovAnrat, EvpBadrew, Kowwveiv ois 
av €0éAn, Kal mapa tadra mavta wdedetoar 
Kepdaivovta TO pu) Svaxepaivew TO dduKety: eis 

2 Cf. infra 540 c. 

> Cf. infra 613 ©, Gorg. 486 c, 509 a, Apol. 32 p. The 
Greeks were sensitive to rude or boastful speech. 

¢ Or strictly ‘‘impaled.’’ Cf. Cic. De Rep. iii. 27. Writers 

on Plato and Christianity have often compared the fate 
of Plato’s just man with the Crucifixion. 


Bf Ce & aes ee fn a Tea Deru oe; laet 


the other of justice, we may pass judgement which <“o ‘ 
of the two is the happier.” 

V. “Bless me, my dear Glaucon,” said I, “how 
strenuously you polish off each of your two men for 
the competition for the prize asif it were a statue!” 
“To the best of my ability,” he replied, “and if such 
is the nature of the two, it becomes an easy matter, 
I fancy, to unfold the tale of the sort of life that 
awaits each. We must tell it, then; and even if my 
language is somewhat rude and brutal,? you must not 
suppose, Socrates, that it is I who speak thus, but 
those who commend injustice above justice. What 
they will say is this: that such being his disposition 
the just man will have to endure the lash, the rack, 
chains, the branding-iron in his eyes, and finally, 
after every extremity of suffering, he will be crucified,° 
and so will learn his lesson that not to be but to seem 
just is what we ought to desire. And the saying of 
Aeschylus? was, it seems, far more correctly applicable 
to the unjust man. For it is literally true, they will 
say, that the unjust man, as pursuing what clings 
closely to reality, to truth, and not regulating his 
life by opinion, desires not to seem but to be unjust, 

Exploiting the deep furrows of his wit 

From which there grows the fruit of counsels shrewd, 
first office and rule in the state because of his reputa- 
tion for justice, then a wife from any family he 
chooses, and the giving of his children in marriage 
to whomsoever he pleases, dealings and partnerships 
with whom he will, and in all these transactions 
advantage and profit for himself because he has no 
squeamishness about committing injustice; and so 

© Septem 592-594. 

> : ' 

(7° WIR 1? CRD weve nd qGrncO\ 

Ut 1e-7¥ =" 


dy@vas toivuy idvra Kal idia Kat Snpooia zrept- 
ylyvesBar Kal mAcovexreiv tv &exOpav, mAcov- 
extobvta dé mdAovreiv Kal tots te didovs «bd 
C mrovetv Kal Tovs ex9povs Brarrew, kal Geots Ovaias — 
Kal dvabjpara ixav@s Kal peyahompenas Ovdew 
TE Kat dvariBévar, Kal Deparrevew TOO Sixaiov 
ToAd dyewov Tods Deods Kal tdv avOpumwv ods 
av BovAnra, worte Kal Deopuréarepov avrov elvau 
padMov MpoanKew eK TOV etkoTeoy TOV Sixavoy. 
ovTw daciv, @ LuKpares, mapa Gedy Kal Tap 
dvOpesrrony T® dadikw mapeckevdcba tov fiov 
dpewov 7) TO Sucate. 
VI. Tair’ <izdvtos tot TAavcwvos, eyo 
D ev v@ elyov tu Adyew mpos rabra, 6 S5é ddeAdos 
adrobd ’Adeiwavros, OU ti mov ote, bn, @ Ud- 
Kpares, ixav@s eiphaba: mepl tod Adyouv; *AAAa 
Ti pv; elmov. Avro, 4h 8 ds, odK elpntat 6 
padiora der pyOfvar. Odxobr, i, oe eyes, TO 
Acyopevov, adeAdos _ wopi Tapetn* adore Kat ov, ; 
et tT d8¢ Meret, erdpuve. Kaitou epe ye heave 
Kal Ta Ud Tovtov pybévta katamahatoat Kat . 
E ddvvatov roujoa Bonfety Sixarcoovvyn. Kat Os, 
Odvder, én, Adyeis, GAN ert Kai Tdde aKove* Set 
yap dieAbeiv uds Kai tods évavtiovs Adyous av . 
60 elev, of deKavoovvny prev errawodow, adiKiav 
dé Péyovaww, tv’ 7 caddorepov 6 por SoKet BovAe- 
, , , \ , 
aba TAavcwv. Aéyovor dé mov Kai mapaxeAevovTat 
matépes Te vido. Kal mavres of TWwaV KyddpEvoL, 

@ Cf. supra on 343 pv, 349 B. > Cf. supra 332 dD. 
© weyadorperas.. Usually a word of ironical connotation 
in Plato. 
4 Cf. Buthyphro 12 & ff. and supra 331 B, #e@ @volas, where 


. vc 

they say that if he enters into lawsuits, public or 
private, he wins and gets the better of his opponents, 
and, getting the better,’ is rich and benefits his friends 
and harms his enemies? ; and he performs-sacrifices 
and peepee votive: offerings to the-gods adequately 
and magnificently,’ and he serves and pays court # to 
men whom he favours and to the gods far better 
than the just man, so that he may reasonably expect 
the favour of heaven ® also to fall rather-to him than 
to the just. So much better they say, Socrates, is 
the_life that is prepared for the unjust man from 
gods and men than that which awaits the just.” 

VI. When Glaucon had thus spoken, I had a mind to 
make some reply thereto, but his brother Adeimantus 
said, “ You surely don’t suppose, Socrates, that the 
statement of the case is complete?”’ ‘“ Why, what 
else?” Isaid. “The very most essential point,” said 
he, “ has not been mentioned.” “ Then,” said I, “‘ as 
the proverb has it, ‘ Let a brother help a man’ /—and 
so, if Glaucon omits any word or deed, do you come 
to his aid. Though for my part what he has already 
said is quite enough to overthrow me and incapacitate 
me for coming to the rescue of justice.” ‘“ Nonsense,” 
he said, “ but listen to this further point. We must 
set forth the reasoning and the language of the 
opposite party, of those who commend justice and 
dispraise injustice, if what I conceive to be Glaucon’s 
meaning is to be made more clear. Fathers, when 
they” address exhortations to their sons;~and= all 

the ceespectahic morality of the goc good. Cephalus | is virtually 
identical with this commercial view of religion. 

© Cf. supra 352 B and 613 a-B 

f ddehpis dvdpl wapein. The rhythm perhaps indicates a 
proverb of which the scholiast found the source in Odyssey 
xvi. 97. 


ix evi 14 Suces4s F wt } Phen 



* ¢ A / > > 1% 4 > 
363 as xpr Sixatov elvar, odk atbrdo SuKkatoovyyy ér- 
awobvtes, aAAa Tas am atris eddoKiyjoets, iva 
Soxobvre Sixaiw e«lvar ylyvntar amd ths Sens 
apxat te Kal yduou Kal doamep TAadcwv diqdOev 
apTt amd Tob «ddoKipmeiy OvTa TH Gdikw.’ emt 
/ A oe \ ~ ~ , A \ 
méov d€ odtor Ta THV SoEBv Aéyovar- Tas yap 
\ ~ > , > , a 
mapa Oedv eddoKiuryoes euBdddAovres apfova 
éxouvat Adyew ayabd, Tots daiois & fact Oeods 
dddvar, Womep 6 yevvatos ‘Hatodds te Kat “Opn- 
Bpés daow, 6 pev tas dpbs Tots Suxatos Tods Beovs 
akpas pev te hépew Baddvous, weooas dé peAtooas 
> / > WH 4 cal / 
etpotoxot 8’ dies, Pyoiv, waddots KaraBeBpibact, 
Kal addAa 8) 7odAd ayaba tovTwy éydpeva’ Tapa- 
mAjova dé Kal 6 Erepos* Wore Tev yap dyow 
} BaotrAfjos duvpovos, date Jeovd)s 
edduxias avéxnor, dépynor dé yata péeAawa 
\ \ / / \ / a 
C mvpods Kai KpiOds, BpiOnor Se S&vdpea Kaprd, 
ul >» ~ / \ / > ~ 
tixTyn & eumeda pda, OdAacoa dé tapéexn ixOis. 
Movoatos S€. tovtwy veavikwtepa tayaba Kal 6 

1 aéixw recent Mss.; ¢f. 362 B: the dcxaly of A and II can 
be defended. 

* Who, in Quaker language, have a concern for, who 
have charge of souls. Cf. the admonitions of the father 
of Horace, Sat. i. 4. 105 ff., Protag. 325 p, Xen. Cyr. i. 
5. 9, Isoe. iii. 2, Terence, Adelphi 414 f., Schmidt, Ethik 
der Griechen, i. p. 187, and the letters of Lord Chesterfield 
passim, as well as Plato himself, Laws 662 x. 

» Hesiod, Works and Days 232 f., Homer, Od. xix. 109 ff. 

¢ Of. Kern, Orphicorum Fragmenta, iv. p. 83. The son is 
possibly Eumolpus. 



eee es ASG FY WARY as 
oom 4 

THE REPUBLIC, BOOK II fee tient \ 
wey a i¥ 

those who _haye others_in_their-eharge,*-urge the 
necessity of being just, not by praising justice itself, 

bu mankind that accrues,from | 
it, the obj d-before-us being that by — 

seeming to be just the man may get from the 
reputation office and alliances and all the good things 
that Glaucon just now enumerated as coming to the 
unjust man from his good name. But those people 
draw out still further this topic of reputation. For, 
throwing in good standing with the gods, they 
have no lack of blessings to describe, which they 
affirm the gods give to pious men, even as the worthy 
Hesiod and Homer? declare, the one that the gods 
make the oaks bear for the just: 
Acorns on topmost branches and swarms of bees on their 
and he tells how the 
Flocks of the fleece-bearing sheep are laden and weighted 
with soft wool, 
and of many other blessings akin to these; and 
similarly the other poet : 
Even as when a good king, who rules in the fear of the 
hi h gods, 
Upholds justice and right, and the black earth yields him 
her foison, 
Barley and wheat, and his trees are laden and weighted 
with fair fruits, 
Increase comes to his flocks and the ocean is teeming with 
And Musaeus and his son’ have? a more excellent 

# For the thought of the following cf. Emerson, Compensa- 
tion: *“‘He (the preacher) assumed that judgement is not 
executed in this world; that the wicked are successful; that 
the good are miserable; and then urged from reason and 
scripture a compensation to be made to both parties in the 
next life. No offence appeared to be taken by the congrega- 
tion at this doctrine.” 

VOL, I K ; 129 




e\ ] ~ ‘ ~ / a / > 
vids adtod mapa Oe@dv diddacu Tots SuKaiors: ets 
“AiSov yap ayayovtes TO Adyw Kal KatakAivavTes 
Kal oupmoctov TOV dolwy KaTacKevdoavTes €aTE- 
havwpevovs Trovodat Tov dtavTa xpovov 75n Sudyew 

a ‘ 
peOvovras, Hynoduevor KdANOoTOV apeThs probov 
péeOnv aidvov: ot & er TovTwy paKkpoTépous 

~ a A 
dmoteivovat' pucbods mapa Oedv: matdas yap 
‘ A 
maldwv dact Kal yéevos Katomobev relrecar Tod 
daiov Kai eddpKov. tadta 81) Kal aAda Tovadra 
eyKwpudlovar Sixaocvvyv: tods S€ dvociovs av 
Kal ddikous eis myAdv tiva KaTopUTTrovow eV 
o 5 ‘ Ud Ld > / / mw 

Avdou kali Kookivw vdwp avaykalovar pépew, Ett 
te Cavras eis Kakas ddfas dyovres, amep LAavKwv 
mept TOv Sixaiwy So€alopéevwy dé ddikwy SiAjAGe 
TyLwpHaTa, TadTa mepl TOV adiKwv Aé€yovow, 
LAA be > ” c \ > »” A c 
dAva dé odK éxyovow. 6 pev ody Emawos Kal O 
usoyos oTOS EKaTépwr. 

VII. [pos 8€ rovrous oxépar, & Le«pares, adAo 

/ ‘ \ > / 
ad eldos Adywv mepi Sixasoadvyns Te Kal dducias 
iSta te Aeyopevov Kal bro TounTtav. mdavTes yap 
€€ Evds aTdpatos buvodaw, ws Kaddv pev 7) cwppo- 
atvn Te Kat Stkaoodvn, yaderov pevTor Kat 
> / > / A ‘ > / ¢ A A ‘ 
€mimovov: akoAacia dé Kal ddukia dd pev Kat 

> \ /, 0 Ps) , be / A / > 

evmetées KTHoacIa, Sdén S€ povov Kal voum at- 
/, ~ , \ Ld 

aypov. AvoireAdatepa 5é€ T&v SiKaiwy Ta ddiKa 

1 droreivovow AIIZ: drorlvovew q. 

@ yeavikwrepa is in Plato often humorous and depreciative. 
Cf. infra 563 E veavixy. 

> cuuréc.ov T&v dclwv. Jowett’s notion that this is a jingle 
is due to the English pronunciation of Greek. 

¢ Kern, ibid., quotes Servius ad Virgil, Aen. iii. 98 “ et nati 


song* than these of the blessings that the gods 
bestow on the righteous. For they conduct them 
to the house of Hades in their tale and arrange a 
symposium of the saints,” where, reclined on couches 
and crowned with wreaths, they entertain the time 
henceforth with wine, as if the fairest meed of virtue 
were an everlasting drunk. And others extend still 
further the rewards of virtue from the gods. For 
they say that the children’s children*® of the pious 
and oath-keeping man and his race thereafter never 
fail. Such and such-like are their praises of justice. 
But the impious and the unjust they bury in mud? 
in the house of Hades and compel them to fetch water 
in a sieve,’ and, while they still live, they bring them 
into evil repute, and all the sufferings that Glaucon 
enumerated as befalling just men who are thought 
to be unjust, these they recite about the unjust, but 
they have nothing else to say! Such is the praise 
and the censure of the just and of the unjust. 

VII. “ Consider further, Socrates, another kind of 
language about justice and injustice employed by both 
laymen and poets. All with one accord reiterate that 
soberness and righteousness are fair and honourable, 
to be sure, but unpleasant and laborious, while licen- 
tiousness and injustice are pleasant and easy to win 
and are only in opinion and by convention disgraceful. 
They say that injustice pays better than justice, 

ae and opines that Homer took //. xx. 308 from 
Cf. Zeller, Phil. d. Gr. i. pp. 56-57, infra 533 pb, 

Phaedo 69 c, commentators on Aristoph. Frogs 146. 

* Cf. my note on Horace, Odes iii. 11. 22, and, with an 
allegorical application, Gorg. 493 B. 

7 Plato elsewhere teaches that the real punishment of sin 
is to be cut off from communion with the good. Theaetet. 
176 p-x, Laws 728 B, infra 367 a. 



ws emt TO TAHGVos A€yovor, Kal movnpods TrAovatous 
kat dAAas dvvdpers €xovtas evdaovilew Kal 
Tysav edyep@s eOéAovor Synpocia te Kal idia, Tods 
B dé ariydlew Kal drepopav, of av mn aobeveis re 
Kal mevntes Wow, dpodoyobvres adtovds apeivous 
elvar TOV ETéepwv. TovTwy dé mavTwY ot Tepl Dedv 
te Adyou Kal apeTijs Oavpacuistator Aێyovtar, ws 
dpa Kat Qeot moddois pev ayabois dvarvyias Te 
Kat Biov Kaxov éveysav, Tots 5° évaytious evavTiav 
poipay. aytptar dé Kal pavreis emt mAovoiwv 
Oupas iovres mreiBovow ws €oTt Tapa odior Svvapus 
ex Jedv ropilopevn Ovoias Tre Kat emwdais, etre 
Cru adiknud tov yéyovev adrod 7 mpoydvwr, aKet- 
cba pel? Hdovdv te Kal €opr@v, édv ré Twa 
exOpov amnphnvar e0éAn, peta opikpa@v Saravav 
dpotws Sikaov ddikw BAdipbew, emaywyats tot 
Kal KaTadéopots Tovs Deovs, ws pact, meifovtés 
aduow wdanpeteiv. tovtTois S¢€ maar tois Adyois 
pidptupas Trowtas emdyovrat, of ev Kakias TépL 
ev7etelas Sid0vTes, wes 
\ A / 4 > ‘ ” ey 7 
Thy pev KaKoTyTa Kal tAadov EoTrw €AEobat 
¢ .O7 / \ ¢ / / > > 4 rd 
D_ pyidiws: Ain pev 686s, pada 8 eyydOu vaier- 
Ths 5° apeths idipOra Oeoi mpordpowev €Onkav 
Kal Twa Od0v aKkpay Te Kal avavrTn’ ot dé THs TOV 
* The gnomic poets complain that bad men prosper for a 
time, but they have faith in the late punishment of the wicked 
and the final triumph of justice. 
® There is a striking analogy between Plato’s language 
here and the description by Protestant historians of the sale 
of indulgences by ‘Tetzel in Germany. Rich men’s doors is 
proverbial. Cf. 489 sz. 
¢ Cf. Mill, ‘* Utility of Religion,” Three Essays on Religion, 
p- 90: “All positive religions aid this self-delusion. Bad 
religions teach that divine vengeance may be bought off by 

mee \ A, Sia aD Bg dt A ae, =~) aioe 
4 '’ 


pvVuU f x 

for the most part, and they do not scruple to felicitate 
bad men who are rich or have other kinds of power 
and to do them honour in public and private, and to 
dishonour and disregard those who are in any way 
weak or poor, even while admitting that they are 
better men than the others. But the strangest of 
all these speeches are the things they say about the 
gods ® and virtue, how so it is that the gods themselves 
assign to many good men misfortunes and an evil 
life, but to their opposites a contrary lot; and begging 
priests ” and soothsayers go to rich men’s doors and 
make them believe that they by means of sacrifices 
and incantations have accumulated a treasure of 
power from the gods ° that can expiate and cure with 
pleasurable festivals any misdeed of a man or his 
ancestors, and that if a man wishes to harm an 
enemy, at slight cost he will be enabled to injure 
just and unjust alike. since they are masters of 
spells and enchantments@ that constrain the gods to 
serve their end. And for all these sayings they cite 
the poets as witnesses, with regard to the ease and 
plentifulness of vice, quoting : 

Evil-doing in plenty a man shall find for the seeking ; 

Beath ai way and it lies near at hand and is easy 

Oo enter; 
But on the pathway of virtue the gods put sweat from 
the first step,* 

and a certain long and uphill road. And others cite 

offerings or personal abasement.” Plato, Laws 885 p, 
anticipates Mill. With the whole passage compare the scenes 
at the founding of Cloudcuckootown, Aristoph. Birds 960- 
990, and more seriously the mediaeval doctrine of the 
“treasure of the church” and the Hindu tapas. 

* In Laws 933 p both are used of the victim with érwéais, 
which primarily applies to the god. Cf. Lucan, Phars. vi. 492 
and 527. * Hesiod, Works and Days 287-289. 


“ : i> 
‘ 4, a. : 


Ded o bn’ dvO peirreny Tmapaywyis tov “Ounpov pap- 
TUpovTaL, OTL Kal eKeivos elme 

\ , ‘ ‘ > , 
Avorol S€ re Kat Beot adroit, 
\ a 
Kat Tods pev Avolacr Kal edywdAais ayavatow 
a / ~ 
E AoiBH te Kvion te mapatpwna@o’ avOpwror 
/ Lf c 
Avcodpevor, Ste Kev Tis brepBrn Kal duapTy. 

BiBAwv 5€ dpadov mapéxovtat Movaatov Kai *Op- 

, /, \ ~ b] , oe 
déws, UeAjvyns te Kal Movodv eyydvwv, ws pact, 

> “A ~ / > /, > , 

kal? ds OunmoAobat, meiPovres od} provov idwwTas 


adAa Kal oActs, Ws apa Adoes TE Kal Kafappot 

> / \ ~ ‘ ~ ¢ ~ » Ove | 

adiucnudtwy dia Ovowv Kal rradias AdSovav e€tat 

~ \ 

365 pev ere (dow, eiol S€ Kal teAevTHoaow, as 87 

TeXeTas Kadodow, at TOV éxel KaK@v azroAvovow 
Has, [1 Qvoavras dé dewa TEPYLEVEl.. 

VIII. Taira mdvra, edn, @ pide Uebxpares, 
Tovaira Kal Tooadra Acyopeva dperiis mépt kal 
Kakias, Ws davOpwmo. Kai Oeoi wept adra Exovar 
TuLhsS, TL oldpefa aKkovovcas véwv yuxas Totty, 
doo eddveis Kal tkavol emi mavra Ta Aeyoueva 
womep eémimtopevot avdrdoyioacba e€ adrarv, 

B ots tis dv dv Kal mh mopeviels tov Biov ws 
»” / , ‘ “ > ~ ; ee 
dpiota SueAPor; A€you yap av eK TV €iKoTwV 
mpos adrov kata Ilivdapov éxeivo To 

2 Tliad, ix. 497 ff. adapted. 

b duador, lit. noise, hubbub, babel, here contemptuous. 
There is no need of the emendation dpuaédy. Cf. infra 387 a, 
and Kern, Orphicorum Fragmenta, p.82; ¢f. John Morley, 
Lit. Studies, p. 184, ‘‘ A bushel of books. ” 

ae 4 Laws 819 B. 

4 Of. Unity of Plato’s Thought, p. 25: “ His (Plato’s) 
imagination was beset by the picture of some brilliant young 


Homer as a witness to the beguiling of gods by men, 

since he too said: 

The gods themselves are moved by prayers, 

And men by sacrifice and soothing vows, 

And incense and libation turn their wills 

Praying, whene’er they have sinned and made trans- 


And they produce a bushel ® of books of Musaeus and 
Orpheus, the offspring of the Moon and of the 
Muses, as they affirm, and these books they use in 
their ritual, and make not only ordinary men but 
states believe that there really are remissions of 
sins and purifications for deeds of injustice, by means 
of sacrifice and pleasant sport ¢ for the living, and that 
there are also special rites for the defunct, which 
they call functions, that deliver us from evils in that 
other world, while terrible things await those who 
have neglected to sacrifice. 

VIII. “ What, Socrates, do we suppose is the effect 
of all such sayings about the esteem in which men and 
gods hold virtue and vice upon the souls that hear 
them, the souls of young men who are quick-witted 
and capable of flitting, as it were, from one expres- 
sion of opinion to another and inferring from them 
all the character and the path whereby a man would 
lead the best life? Such a youth? would most likely 
put to himself the question Pindar asks, ‘Is it by 

Alcibiades standing at the crossways of life and debating in 
his mind whether his best chance of happiness lay in accept- 
ing the conventional moral law that serves to police the 
vulgar or in giving rein to the instincts and appetites of his 
own stronger nature. To confute the one, to convince the 
other, became to him the main problem of moral philosophy.”’ 

eee x-xi; also “‘ The Idea of Good in Plato’s Republic,” 
p. 214. 



/ / ca 4 
motepov Sika tetyos tov 
Bal a 
 oKxodais andra 

dvaBas Kal é€uavTov ovTw mepuppatas Sia id ; 
Ta pev yap Acyopneva Sikaiw pev ovte HOt, éav 
py Kat d0xB,' ddedos obdéy gaow elvat, mdovous 
dé Kai Cnuias pavepas: adixw dé dd€av Sixavoovvns 
TapacKevacapevep Beoméowos Bios Aéyerat. odkobv, 
C emevd) TO SoKeiv, Ws dnAodat por of codoi, Kal 
tav dAdBevav Bidrar Kal KUpiov eddamovias, emt 
todTo 51 Tpemréov dAws* mpdbvpa pev Kal oxjwa 
KUKA@ Tept euavTov oKiaypadiay apeTis TeEpt- 
ypantéov, tiv Sé tod aodwrarov *ApxtAdxouv 
aArdmeka EAxréov e€dmiabev KepdaAeay Kal TrouKtAnv. 
adAa ydp, dynoi tis, od pddiov det AavOdvew 
Kakov ovTa. ovde€ yap dAdo ovdev evieTeés, 
D djoopev, TOv peyddav: add’ copes, él _ HeMopev 
eVOatpLovniceLy, ravry iréov, ws ta tyvn Tov 
Adywv déper. emi yap 7d AavOdvew Evvwpooias 
Te Kal érawpetas ouvdgopuev, €iot TE mreifods du- 
ddoKadou copiay Snenyopexty Te Kat SukaveKny 
didvtes, e€ Ov Ta pev Tretvopev, 7a. d€ Biacopeba, 
ws mXeoverroivres Sixnv pi Siddvar. adda 81) 
Beods obre avOdvew ovre Pidcacbar Svvaror. 
ovKouv, ef pev pr) elolv H pydev adrois Tay av- 
1 gay wh kal doxd] cf. Introd. xlix. éay xal wh Sox would, 

unless we assume careless displacement of the xa/, mean “ if 
I also seem not to be (just).” 

@ gavepa fnuta is familiar and slightly humorous. Cf. 
Starkie on Aristoph. Acharn. 737. 
> Simonides, Fr. 76 Bergk, and Eurip. Orest. 236, 




justice or by crooked deceit that I the higher tower 
shall scale and so live my life out in fenced and 
ed security?” The consequences of my being 

just are, unless I likewise seem so, not assets,* they 
say, but liabilities, labour and total loss; but if I 
am unjust and have procured myself a reputation 
for justice a godlike life is promised. Then since it 
is “the seeming,’ as the wise men? show me, that 
“masters the reality ’ and is lord of happiness, to this 
I must devote myself without reserve. For a front 
and a show’ I must draw about myself a shadow- 
outline of virtue, but trail behind me the fox of 
the most sage Archilochus,? shifty and bent on gain. 
Nay, ‘tis objected, it is not easy for a wrong-doer 
always to lie hid. Neither is any other big thing 
facile, we shall reply. But all the same if we expect 
to be happy, we must pursue the path to which the 
footprints of our arguments point. For with a view 
to lying hid we will organize societies and political 
clubs,’ and there are teachers of cajolery? who impart 
the arts of the popular assembly and the court-room. 
So that, partly by persuasion, partly by force, we 
‘shall contrive to overreach with impunity. But 
against the gods, it may be said, neither secrecy nor 
force can avail. Well, if there are no gods, or they 
* A Pindaric mixture of metaphors beginning with a portico 
and garb, continuing with the illusory perspective of scene- 
painting, and concluding with the crafty fox trailed behind. 
¢ Cf. Fr. 86-89 Bergk, and Dio Chrysost. Or. 55. 285 R. 

kepdadéay is a standing epithet of Reynard. Cf. Gildersleeve 
on Pind. Pyth. ii. 78. 

* Of. my review of Jebb’s “ Bacchylides,” Class. Phil., 
1907, vol. ii. p. 235. 

! Cf. George Miller Calhoun, Athenian Clubs in Politics 
and Litigation, University of Chicago Dissertation, 1911. 

* Lit. persuasion. Cf, the definition of rhetoric, Gorg. 453 a. 



E Opwrrivwv pede, 088" Hiv weAnréov tod AavOdvev* 
et d€ eloi te Kal éemyseAodvtar, odK dAAobev Tot 
adrovs towev 7) aKkynKoapev 7) EK TE TOV Adywr 
kal TOV yeveadoynodvrwy monTta@v: ot 8€ avdrot 
obra. A€yovow, ws eiciv olor Ovaiais te Kal 
edywrais ayavnot Kal avaljuact mapdayeobau 
avarreBopevor* ols 7 auddtepa 7 ovdeTEpa TrEL- 
atéov: ef 8 ody mevaTéov, adiuKyntéov Kai Quréov 

366 a70 TOv dducnudtwv. Sikawor pev yap ovTes 
alnutor t7o Oedv eadpcba, ta 8 e€& dducias | 
Kepdn amwaduea: aduKou dé _kepSavodpev TE ral 
Avoodpevor brrepBaivorres Kal auaptavovTes met- 
fovres adrovs alrpwoe dmradrd£ojev. ava yap | 
év “Auou Sieny dSwoopmev Ov av evade adicpowper, / 
7 avrol 7 maides Traidov. aN’ ® dire, poe el 
Aoytlopevos, ai Tederal ad péeya Svvavrac® Kat ot 

B Avawor Beoi, ds at peyorat moAeus A€yovar Kal ot 
Oedv maides, Tmounrat Kal _ Mpophrat Tov Oeadv 
yevopevot, ot Tabra, obrws exew penviovow. 

IX. Kara tiva obdv €Tt Adyov | Sucaroovyny dv 
m™po peylorns aduxias aipoiue’ av; av édv per” 
evoxnpoovyns eBdjAov KTnowpeba, Kal Tapa. 
eois Kal Tap" avOpurrous mpagopev KaTa voov 
Sieke Te Kal TeAeuTHOAVTEs, WSs 6 TOV TOAAGY ' 

1 ot5’ q: cai A. This is the simplest and most plausible 
text. For a possible defence of kai ef. Introd: p. xlix. 
2 ab wéya dtvavtac: A omits. 

¢ For the thought compare Tennyson, “ Lucretius”: | 
But he that holds 
The Gods are careless, wherefore need he care 
Greatly for them ? 
Cf. also Eurip. J.A. 1034-1035, Anth. Pal. x. 34. 
> Of. Verres’ distribution of his three years’ spoliation of 


do not concern themselves with the doings of men, 
neither need we concern ourselves with eluding their 
observation. If they do exist and pay heed, we 
know and hear of them only from such discourses 
and from the poets who have described their pedigrees. 
But these same authorities tell us that the gods 
are capable of being persuaded and swerved from 
their course by ‘ sacrifice and soothing vows’ and 
dedications. We must believe them in both or 
neither. And if we are to believe them, the thing 
to do is to commit injustice and offer sacrifice from 
the fruits of our wrong-doing.? For if we are just, 
we shall, it is true, be unscathed by the gods, but we 
shall be putting away from us the profits of injustice ; 
but if we are unjust, we shall win those profits, and, 
by the importunity of our prayers, when we trans- 
gress and sin we shall persuade them and escape 
scot-free. Yes, it will be objected, but we shall be 
brought to judgement in the world below for our un- 
just deeds here, we or our children’s children. ‘ Nay, 
my dear sir,’ our calculating friend will say, ‘here 
again the rites for the dead? have muchefficacy, and the 
absolving divinities, as the greatest cities declare, and 
the sons of gods, who became the poets and prophets ° 
of the gods, and who reveal that this is the truth.’ 
IX. “ On what further ground, then, could we prefer 
justice to supreme injustice? If we combine this 
with a counterfeit decorum, we shall prosper to our 
heart’s desire, with gods and men, in life and death, as 
the words of the multitude and of men of the highest 

Sicily, Cic. In C. Verrem actio prima 14 (40), and Plato, 
Laws 906 c-p, Lysias xxvii. 6. 

* His morality is the hedonistic calculus of the Protagoras 
or the commercial religion of ** other-worldliness.” 

* For these rederai cf.3654. * Or rather “ mouthpieces.” 



TE Kal dicpeov Aeyopevos Adyos. ex 81) mavTwr 
TOV etpnLeveov tis HIXaVT, @ LaKpares, diuKa.o- 
C oodvny TyLdy eOerew, @ Tes Svvapis Umdpxev puyts 
7) Xpnparev 7 odpatos 7 yevous, aAAa BH yedgv 
emauvoupLevi)s GicovovTa.; wos 57 TOL et Tis €xeL 
pevd7j pev dmophvat a eipynkapev, ixava@s be 
eyvenkev ore dporov _Succvoodvy ; moAAy Tov 
ovyyvwunv éxer Kal odK dpyileras Tots adixots, 
ard’ oldev, Ste mAjv «i Tis Oeta ddce Sucyepaiver 
TO aduKety H emoTHunv AaBoy améxerar adrod, 
Dra@v ye dAdwy oddeis éExdv Sixavos, add’ dr 
avavoplas 7) yipws 7 Twos aAAns dobeveias eye 

TO aduceiv, ddvvardv adro Spav. ws dé, SHAov- 

6 yap mp@tos tav TovovTwv cis Sdvayuw €APdyv 
mp&ros aduxet, Kal” doov a olds T ur Kal TOUTWY 
dmdvray ovdev aMo _airiov 7 eKetvo, devirep 
divas 6 Adyos obTos copunoe Kal THE Kal é€pot 
mpos oé, ® LdKpares, eizeiv, ott, @ Oavpdore, 
Emavrwy ty@dv, door éemaivera. date duxaoovvns 
elvat, amo Tov e€€& dpxijs Tpaov dpfdpevor, 6awv 
Adyou AcAeupevor, expt Tav viv dvO perry 
ovdets muwmote efeEev adiKiay ovd” emyjvece 
duxaoovynvy GAAws 7 Sdgas Te Kal Tipas Kal 
Swpeds Tas am atTdv yryvopevas: atto & 
Exadtepov TH avTob Suvdue. ev TH ToD ExoVvTOS 
uy evov Kat AavOavov Beovs te Kal avOparovs 
ovdets mosTore ovr” ev rroujoet ovr’ ev iStous Adyous 
emelpOev ¢ ixavOs TO Aoyw, os TO pev péeyroTov 
KaKOY doa toxet pox ev awry, Sucavoovvn 82 
367 éytotov ayabov. ef yap otrws eAéyero e€ apyis 

@ Aristoph. Clouds 1241. > Cf. Gorg. 492 a. 


authority declare. In consequence, then, of all 
that has been said, what possibility is there, Socrates, 
that any man who has the power of any resources 
of mind, money, body, or family should consent to 
honour justice and not rather laugh* when he hears 
her praised? In sooth, if anyone is able to show the 
falsity of these arguments, and has come to know 
with sufficient assurance that justice is best, he 
feels much indulgence for the unjust, and is not 
angry with them, but is aware that except a man 
by inborn divinity of his nature disdains injustice, 
or,having won to knowledeeé} refrains from it, no one 
else is wi just, but that it is from lack of manly 
spirit or from old age or some other weakness? that 
men dispraise injustice, lacking the power to practise 
it. The fact is patent. For no sooner does such 
an one come into the power than he works injustice 
to the extent of his ability. And the sole cause of 
all this is the fact that was the starting-point of this 
entire plea of my friend here and of myself to you, 
Socrates, pointing out how strange it is that of all 
you self-styled advocates of justice, from the heroes 
of old whose discourses survive to the men of the 
present day, not one has ever censured injustice or 
commended justice otherwise than in respect of the 
repute, the honours, and the gifts that accrue from 
each. But what each one of them is in itself, by 
its own inherent force, when it is within the soul of 
the possessor and escapes the eyes of both gods and 
men, no one has ever adequately set forth in poetry 
or prose—the proof that the one is the greatest of all 
evils that the soul contains within itself, while justice 
is the greatest good. For if you had all spoken in 
this way from the beginning and from our youth up 



bo mavTwv bu@v Kal €k véewy Huds émeiBere, odK 
av aAAijAous epuddrropev ft) aduKkeiy, aN’ adTos 
abToob iy EKAOTOS dpLotos PvrAa€, Sedids x7) aduxdiv 
TO peylorep Kang Evvoucos }. Tatra, ® La- 
Kpates, laws S€ Kal é7t ToUTwY TAciw Opactpayds 
te Kal dAAos mov tis tbrép Suxavoovvns Te Kal 
ddikias Aéyouev ay, _petaatpegovres abroiv TH 
Svvayuy, dopTikOs, ws yé por doxet- add’ eyo, 
B oddev yap ge déopae amoxptmrecbar, aod emBupav 
aKodoat Tavavria., ws Svvapiae pdduora. kararetvas 
Aéyw. put) obv Hiv povov evdelEn 7@ Aoyw, Ott 
Sucaroovvn dducias KpetrTov, GMa ri Towdoa 
éxatépa Tov éyovTa av7? dv adTHy 7) wev KaKOV, 
» 5€ ayabov éortt: Tas de ddgas dpaiper, wamTep 
TPAavcwv StexeAcvoaro. el yap [2 ddaupricers 
exarépwbev Tas dAn Geis, tas de wevdeis mpoobrjaets, 
ov TO Sixavov djoomev emauweiv oe, aAAd. TO Soxeiv, 
C oddé 7d adixov elvas peyew, adda. TO Soxeiv, | kal 
trapakeAcvecba adikov ovta AavOdvew, Kai dpo- 
Aoyeitv Opacvpayw, dtr TO pev Sixarov adddTprov 
ayabov, Evudépov tot Kpeitrovos, Td S€ aéduKov 
atdTt@ pev Evpepov Kali AvovreAodv, TH SE Hrrove 
aévpdhopov. ézrevd7) odv Wpoddynoas TOV peyloTwY 
ayabay elvar Sixacoovvnv, & TOV Te atroPawovTwv 
am avta@v evexa afia KexThobat, 7oAd dé waAAov 
avira, avTav, olov opay, aKovel, ppovetv, Kat 
D byvaivew 67, Kal 60” adda dyaba, yovepa Th aw 
Tav dice adr od do&) cori, TOUT ov auto 
emaivecov Sikavoovvys, O avT) du adrTHy TOV 

* Cf. supra 363 . > Cf. supra 343 c. 
¢ Adam’s note on yévua: ig. yujova is, I think, wrong. 



had sought to convince us, we should not now be 
ing against one another’s injustice, but each 
would be his own best guardian, for fear lest by 
working injustice he should dwell in communion 
with the greatest of evils. This, Socrates, and 
perhaps even more than this, Thrasymachus and 
haply another might say in pleas for and against 
justice and injustice, inverting their true potencies, 
as I believe, grossly. But I1—for I have no reason 
to hide anything from you—am laying myself out to 

_ the utmost on the theory, because I wish to hear 
its refutation from you. Do not-merely show us by 

argument that justice is superior to injustice, but 
make-clear iy ts what each _in-and-of itself-does to 
its possessor, whereby the one is eyil and the-other 
eee ony with the repute of both, as 

ucon urged. For, unless you take away from 
either the true repute and attach to each the false, 
we shall say that it is not justice that you are praising 
but the semblance, nor injustice that you censure, 
but the seeming, and that you really are exhorting 
us to be unjust but conceal it, and that you are at 
one with Thrasymachus in the opinion that justice 
is the other man’s good, the advantage of the 
stronger, and that injustice is advantageous and 
profitable to oneself but disadvantageous to the 
inferior. Since, then, you have admitted that 
justice belongs to the class of those highest goods 
which are desirable both for their consequences and 
still more for their own sake, as sight, hearing, 
intelligence, yes and health too, and all other goods 
that are productive © by their very nature and not by 
opinion, this is what I would have you praise about 
justice—the benefit which it and the harm which 



Exovta dvivno. Kal adixia BArAdarer: pucbods dé 
kai dd€as mdpes adAows eraweiv. ws eyd Tov 
pev dA\wv dvacyoiunv av ovtws émawovvrwv 
duxatoovrvnv Kali peyovrwy daduciav, Sdo€as Te Trepl 
aitav Kai pucbods eyxwpialovrwy Kal AowWopovr- 
TOV, God de odK av, ei pr) od KeAcous, didTL 
E zavra tov Biov oddév dAdo oxordv dieAjAvbas 7) 
ToOTO. pr odv Hiv evdel—En pwovov TO Aoyw, Ste 
Sixavoovvn ddikias Kpeirtov, dAAa Kal Ti Towotcoa 
éxatépa Tov éxovTa avr? dv” adrHv, éav te AavOdvn 
edv Te p17) Oeovs Te Kal avOpumous, 7) pev ayabor, 
% S€ Kakov éorw. 
X. Kai éyd dxovoas dei ev 57 thy dvow Tod 
te TAavxwvos kat tod ’Adeydvtov jydunv, aTap 
368 odv Kal Tote Tave ye Honv Kat eimov: Od KaKds 
eis buds, @ Tatdes exevou Tod avdpds, TY apxTY 
tav édeyeiwv eénoinceyv 6 TAadkwvos pacts, 
eddoxiunoavtas mept THv Meyapot paxyv, eimwv: 

maidses "Apiotwvos, KAewod Oeiov yévos avdpds. 

TOOTS pot, @ didror, eb doxe? eyew* wavy yap Oetov 
meTovOare, ef jut) Trémevobe adikiay Suxatoadvyns 
dewov elvar, ovrw Suvdevor eimetv brep avdrod. 
B doxeire 54 por ws GAnbds od memetoba. TEK- 
paipopar d€ ex Tod adAov Tod byerepov Tpdzov, 

® Cf. infra 506 c. 

> Cf. my note in Class. Phil. 1917, vol. xii. p. 436. It does 
not refer to Thrasymachus facetiously as Adam fancies, but 
is an honorific expression borrowed from the Pythagoreans. 

© Possibly Critias, 

# Probably the battle of 409 s.c., reported in Diodor. Sie. 
xiii. 65. Cf. Introd. p. viii. 

¢ The implied pun on the name is made explicit in 580 c-p. 



injustice inherently works upon its possessor. But 
the rewards and the honours that depend on opinion, 
leave to others to praise. For while I would listen 
to others who thus commended justice and dis- 
paraged injustice, bestowing their praise and their 
blame on the reputation and the rewards of either, 
I could not accept that sort of thing from you unless 
you say I must, because you have passed your entire 
life* in the consideration of this very matter. Do 
not, then, I repeat, merely prove to us in argument 
| the superiority of justice to injustice, but show us 
what it is that each inherently does to its possessor 
—whether he does or does not escape the eyes of 
gods and men—whereby the one is good and the 
other evil.” . 

X. While I had always admired the natural parts of 
Glaucon and Adeimantus, I was especially pleased by 
their words on this occasion, and said: “It was ex- 
cellently spoken of you, sons of the man we know,” 
in the beginning of the elegy which the admirer“ of 
Glaucon wrote when you distinguished yourselves in 
the battle of Megara 47— 

Sons of Ariston,’ whose race from a glorious sire is 

This, my friends, I think, was well said. For there; 
must indééd be-a-touch-of the-god-like in your dis- 
position if you are not convinced that injustice is 
preferable to justice though you can plead its case | 
in such fashion. And T believe that you are really — 
not convinced. I infer this from your general char- 
Some have held that Glaucon and Adeimantus were uncles 
of Plato, but Zeller decides for the usual view that they were 

his brothers. Cf. Ph. d. Gr. ii. 1, 4th ed. 1889, p. 392, and 
Abhandl. d. Berl. Akad., 1873, Hist.-Phil. Kl. pp. 86 ff. 

VOL. I i 145 


evel KaTa ye adtovs Tods Adyous HricTouv av 
c A @ \ ~ / / a 
bpiv: dow 8€ padAov moredw, TooodTw padov 
aTop@ 6 Tt xpjowpat ovtTe yap dmws Bonld exw 
Sok ydp pow advvatos elvar- onpetov Sé ror, Ort 
ad mpos Opacdpayov Aéywv wunv amodaivew, ws 
dpewvov Sucaoovvy adukias, ovK dmedefaabé pov: 
our’ ad omws 7) Bonbjow exw’ dédouKa yap, [7 
odd" OoLov 7 Tapayevopevov dixavoovvyn Kaknyopou- 
evn amayopevew Kat pr Bonleiy Ett eumveovta 
kal dvvdpevov dbéyyecbar. KpdticTrov odv ovUTws 
omws S¥vajas emiKoupety adTH. 6 Te odv TAavKwv 
‘ e v > /, \ / ~ \ 
kal ot dAdo eddovto mavti tpémm BonOoa Kal 
- / 
pq) aveivar Tov Adyov, GAAd Siepevvyoacbas Ti ré 
€oTw €ekdTepov Kal mepl THs whedrcias adroiv 
> A / ” > bd > ‘ 
Tadn Ges moTEepws EXEL. eizrov obv Srrep €pol edo€ev, 
ore To Cyrnpa @ emtxerpodpev od datdov add’ 
o€d Brérovros, ws Eepol paiverar. ered) joy 
Hets od Sewotl, Soke? por, Hv 8 eyed, TovadTyv 
rojoacba Cirnow adrod, olavrep av ef mpooerake 
Tis ypdupata opiKpa mdéppwlhev avayv@var pr 
mavu 0&0 Brérovow, Emerta Tis Evevonoev, OTL TA 
> A 4 ” ‘ LA / 4 
avTa ypdupata eore mov Kai GAAoh peilw Te Kal 
ev peilov, Epuawov av eddavyn, olwat, exeiva 
mpO@tTov avayvovtas ovtws éemuckomeiv Ta eAdTTW, 
? A > eS ” 4 / \ 2 ” ¢ 
ei Ta adTa ovta tuyxaver. Ildvy pev odv, edn 6 
’"Adeiwavtos: aAAa ti Towwodrov, @ LwKpates, ev 
Th mept To Sikaov Cyntioe Kalopas; "Eyad aor, 
epnv, ep@. Suxavoovvyn, payev, €oTr pev avopos 
evs? »” / Per ¢ 5X II / 
évds, €aTt S€ mov Kal Ans wéAews; Llavu ye, H 
> > a “ / @'>§ > / a 
5’ 6s. Odxodv peilov mods évos avdpds; Meilov, 

* So Aristot. Hth. Nic. i. 2. 8 (1094 b 10). 




acter, since from your words alone I should have 
distrusted you. But the more I trust you the more 
I am at a loss what to make of the matter. I do 
not know how I can come to the rescue. For I 
doubt my ability for the reason that you have not 
accepted the arguments whereby I thought I proved 
against Thrasymachus that justice is better than in- 
justice. Nor yet again do I know how I can refuse 
to come to the rescue. For I fear lest it be actually 

impious to stand idly by whén justice is reviled and 
be Phintsheartert gnd-not-desent-her” 0 long as one 
has breath and-carrutter-his-voice. The best thing, 
then, is to aid her as best I can.”’ Glaucon, then, and 
the rest besought me by all means to come to the 
rescue and not to drop the argument but to pursue 
to the end the investigation as to the nature of 
each and the truth about their respective advantages. 
I said then as I thought: “The inquiry we are 
undertaking is no easy one but calls for keen vision, 
as it seems to me. So, since we are not clever 
persons, I think we should employ the method of 
search that we should use if we,with not very keen 
vision, were—bidden~ to read small letters from a 
distance, and then someone had observed that these 
same letters exist elsewhere larger and-on_a larger 
surface. We should have accounted it a godsend, I 
fancy, to be allowed to read those letters first, and 
then examine the smaller, if they are the same.” 
“ Quite so,” said Adeimantus ; “ but what analogy to 
this do you detect in the inquiry about justice ?” 
“I will tell you,” I said: ‘‘ there is a justice of one 
man, we say, and, I suppose, also of an entire city?” 
“ Assuredly,” said he. “ Is not the city larger* than 
the man?” “ It is larger,” he said. ‘‘ Then, per- 



” ” Ld /, ” 4 > ~ 
éfn. “lows toivuy wAciwy av dSixavoodvy ev TH 
petlov. évein Kal padwy Karapabeiv. «i ovdv 

, ~ > aA , Ve 

369 BotArcobe, _mpGrov ev ais moAeat CnTjowpev 
motov tt €or: emeura ovTws emaxeporpela Kal 
év evi ExdoTw, THY Tob juetLovos Opoudry Ta. ev Th 
rod eAdrrovos ida emoaKomobvres. “AMG pou 
doxeis, edn, Kadds Aéyew. *Ap’ ody, hv 8° eyes, 

el yryvonernv moAw Ocacaipeba AdOyw, Kal THY 
Sixatoovynyv avTis Wouwev av yeyvouerny Kal THV 
> f. Ye ” Ly > ov b) ~ / 
aduxiav; Tay’ av, i 8 ds. Odxodv yevouevou 
avtob €Amis edmetéorepov idetv 6 Cnrodpev; 
B IloAv ye. Aoxe? ov ypivar emixerphoat mepaivew; 
oluat pev yap ovK dAliyov épyov adro elvat- 
a > ” ” if > / 
oxorreite otv. "Koxentar, dn 6 *Adeipavros- 
GAAd 7) GAAws rote. 

XI. Diyverat toivev, fv 8 eyd, mods, ws 
ey@pmar, émeid7) Tvyydver Typav EKaOTOS ovK 
abrapKyns, aAAd mod\Ady evdens: 7 Ti” ole apynv 
” / 
aAAnv modw oikilew; Oddepiav, i 8 os. OtTw 

C8) dpa mapadapBavwv ddAos dAdov én’ aAdov, 
tov 8 én” dddAov xpela, ToAAGv Sedpevor, oAAods 
eis play ounow ayeipavtes Kotvwvovs Te kal 
Bonfovs, TavTN TH Evvouria eOéucba méAw dvopa. 
of yap; Ildvu pev ody. Meradidwor 57) aos 
aw, et Tt peradiiwow, 7 perahapBdver, oldjLevos 
abdT® dyewov elvar. Tlavy ye. “Ih dy, qv & 
ey, TO Aoyw e& apyfs wodpev woAW. Trovjoer 

@ Lit., coming into being. Cf. Introd. p. xiv. So Aristot. 
Pol. i. 1, but iv. 4 he criticizes Plato. 

> “ C’est tout réfléchi.” 

¢ Often imitated, as e.g. Hooker, Eccles. Pol. i. 10: 
“‘ Forasmuch as we are not by ourselves sufficient to furnish 



haps, there would be more justice in the larger 
object and more easy to apprehend. If it please you, 
then, let us first look for its quality in states, and 
then only examine it also in the individual, looking 
for the likeness of the greater in the form of the 
less.” “I think that is a good suggestion,” he said. 
“If, then,” said I, “ our argument should observe 
the origin * of a state, we should see also the origin 
of justice and injustice in it?” ‘‘ It may be,” said 
he. “And if this is done, we may expect to find 
more easily what we are seeking?” “‘ Much more.” 
“Shall we try it, then, and go through with it? I 
fancy itis no slight task. Reflect, then.” ‘‘ We have 
reflected, ” said Adeimantus; “ proceed and don’t 
refuse.” . 
XI. “The origin of the city, then,” said I, “in my 
opinion, is to be found in the fact that we do not 
severally suffice for our own needs,° but each of us 
lacks many things. Do you think any other prin- 
ciple establishes the state?” “ No other,” said he. 
“ As a result of this, then, one man calling in another 
for one service and another for another, we, being 
in need of many things, gather many into one place 
of abode as associates and helpers, and to this 
dwelling together we give the name city or state, 
do we not?” “By allmeans.” ‘‘ And between one 
man and another there is an interchange of giving, if 
it so happens, and taking, because each supposes this 
to be better for himself.” “Certainly.” ‘‘ Come, 
then, let us create a city from the beginning, in our 
ourselves with a competent store of things needful for such a 
life as our nature doth desire . . . therefore to supply these 
defects . . . we are naturally inclined to seek communion 
and fellowship with others; this was the cause of men uniting 
themselves at first in civil societies.” : 


be avriy, os cou, a Tuerépa Xpeta.. las & 
D ov; "AMa. pv mparn ye Kal peyiorn Tav xperdv 
7 Tis tpodijs tapackev? tod elvai te kat Cav 
evexa. [lavrdraci ye. Acvrépa 57) oixrjoews, i 
tpitn de aes Kab TOV Toure. “Eort Tabra.. . 
Pepe 54, Hv 5 eyes, Tm@s 7 TOAs dprécet ent 
Tooaurny TapacKkevyny; dAdo te yewpyos pev cls, 
6 be olKxodopos, aAros dé Tis dpdvrns ; 7 Kal 
OKUTOTOMOV adtéce mpocbjcopev 7 Tw’ aAdAov 
Tov mepl TO oGpa Depamevriy ; Tlavu ye. Ei 
8 av*y ye avaykaordtn modus eK TeTTa pe 7 
E 7evte avdpav. Daiverar. Te 57) obv ; eva éxa- 
oTov ToUTwy det 70 abdTob épyov daa Kowov 
kataribévat, olov TOV yewpyov eva ovTa Tapa 
oxevdlew oitia TéTTApoL Kat TeTpamAdovov xpovov 
T€ Kal 7dvov dvadioxew € émt oitov TApAcKeEry, kal 
dows Kowevety ; 4 dwedjoavra €avT@ povov 
370 TéTapTov bépos movety ToUToU TOD airov ev rerdpte 
pepe TOO xpovov, Ta d€ Tpia, To fev emt TH Tis 
oikias TrapacKeuy dar piBew, TO O€ inariov, TO 
de drodnudtov, Kal 7) dows Kkowwvobvra 
mpaypata éxew, add’ adrov & atdrov ta adrob 
Tparrew ; Kat 6 "Adetwavros edn "AMN’ iaws, 
@ LaKpares, ovTw pdov 7] ‘Keivurs. “Oa8ée, Ta 
5° eyes, po Ae aToTrov. evvod) yap kat avros 
eizovtos Gob, OT mp@Tov pev deta ExacTos ov 
Badvv dpows éexdotw, adda diadépwv tiv diow, 
aAdos én” dddov Epyou mpaéw. 7H od Sox ao; 
@ Aristotle says that the city comes into being for the sake 

of life, but exists for the eile of the good life, which, of 
course, is also Plato’s view of the true raison d’étre of the 

State. Cf. Laws 828 p and Crito 48 s. 
> It is characteristic of Plato’s drama of ideas to give this 



theory. Its real creator, as it appears, will be our 
needs.” ‘“‘Obyiously.’’ ‘‘ Now the first and chief of 
our needs is the provision of food for existence and 
life.”* “ Assuredly.” “The second is housing and 
the third is raiment and that sort of thing.” ‘ That 
is so.” “Tell me, then,” said I, “ how our city will 
suffice for the provision of all these things. Will 
there not be a farmer for one, and a builder, and 
then again a weaver? And shall we add thereto a 

cobbler and some other purveyor for the needs of 

the body?” “Certainly.” ‘‘ The indispensable 
minimum of a city, then, would consist of four or 
five men.” ‘“‘ Apparently.” “‘ What of this, then ? 
Shall each of these contribute his work for the 
common use of all? I mean shall the farmer, who 
is one, provide food for four and spend fourfold time 
and toil on the production of food and share it with 
the others, or shall he take no thought for them and 
provide a fourth portion of the food for himself alone 
in a quarter of the time and employ the other three- 
quarters, the one in the provision of a house, the 
other of a garment, the other of shoes, and not have 
the bother of associating with other people, but, 
himself for himself, mind his own affairs?” ® And 
Adeimantus said, ‘“‘ But, perhaps, Socrates, the former 
way is easier.” “It would not, by Zeus, be at all 
strange,’ said I; “ for now that you have mentioned 
it, it occurs to me myself that, to begin with, our 
several natures are not all alike but different. One 
man is naturally fitted for one task, and another for 
kind of rhetorical ac Daeg 8 to the expression of the view 
that he intends to reject. In what follows Plato anticipates 
the advantages of the division of labour as set forth in Adam 

Smith, with the characteristic exception of its stimulus to 
new inventions. Cf. Introd. xv. 



"Epotye. Ti dé; mOTEpOV KdAAvov mparroe av 
Tes els Ov Todas. TéxXvas epyalopevos, 7) orav 
pia els; “Orav, 7 & és, els piav. "AAA. pay, 
oluat, Kat Toe d7jAov, ws, eav tis Twos Taph 
Epyou Katpov, SioAuras. Ajov yap. Od yap, 
olwo, €Oédeu 70 TparTopevov THY TOO mpaTTOVTOS 
oxoAny mepyseverv, GAN avayKy TOV mparrovra, 
C 7@ Tparropevep eraxohoubetv py ev Tapépyou 
pepet. “Avaynn. "Ex 57) TOUTE tet TE (exaoTa 
ylyverat Kat KdAAuov Kal pdov, dtav els &v Kara 
pvow Kal ev Kapa, oxoAyy Tav adAwv aye, 
marry. Ilavramact pev ovv. TAecoveor 57, é 
"Adcivarte, bet ToAT@v 7) TeTTdpay emt Tas 
mapackevds av eA€yopev" 6 6 yap yewpyos, obs €ouKev, 
ovK avros TOUncETaL € éauT@ TO dpotpov, él peMer 
D Kadov elvan, ovde opeviny ov8é 7aMAa 6 opyava doa 
Tept yewpyiay: odd’ ab 6 oixoddpos- ToAA@v be 
Kal Toure det- Haadtws 8 6 dhavrns Te Kal oO 
OKUTOTOMOS. "AdAnOA. Téxroves 37 Kat xaAnijs 
Kal TowodTolt ties 7oAXol Snpvoupyot, kowwvot 
ey Too moAixviov YLyvolLevor, OUXVOY avTo 
movobow. Idvy pev otv. "AA otk av mw 
mavu ye péya Te ely, ovo” «i avrots Bouxédovs 
TE Kat Touevas TOUS. Te dAAous vopeas mpoobeipev, 
E iva ot te yewpyot éml TO apobv €xovev Bods, ot 
xpholas brroluyiots, bpdvrat dé Kat OKUTOTOMOL 
déppact TE al _ €plots. Ovde Ye, 4 8 Os, opuKpa 
7Aus dy cin exovoa Taro. Tatra. “AAd py, 
hv & ey, Karouctoa ye avrny TV moAw els 
TowbTov Torey, ob eretcaywyiiwr pH Sencerat, 

1 oj6' add. Hermann: it is better but not indispensable. 


another. Don’tyouthinkso?” “Ido.” “ Again, 
would one man do better working at many tasks or 
one at one?” “One at one,” he said. ‘‘ And, fur- 
thermore, this, I fancy, is obvious—that if one lets slip 
the right season, the favourable moment in any task, 
the work is spoiled.” ‘‘ Obvious.” “ That, I take it, is 
because the business will not wait upon the leisure of 
the workman, but the workman must attend to it as 
his main affair, and not as a by-work.” “He must 
indeed.” “The result, then, is that more things are 
produced, and better and more easily when one man 
performs one task according to his nature, at the right 
moment, and at leisure from other occupations.” “‘ By 
all means.” ‘“‘ Then, Adeimantus, we need more than 
four citizens for the provision of the things we have 
mentioned. For the farmer, it appears, will not make 
his own plough if it is to be a good one, nor his hoe, . 
nor his other agricultural implements, nor will the 
builder, who also needs many; and similarly the weaver 
and cobbler.” “True.” ‘“‘Carpenters,then,and smiths 
_ and many similar craftsmen, associating themselves 
with our hamlet, will enlarge it considerably.” ‘‘ Cer- 
tainly.” “ Yet it still wouldn’t be very large even if 
we should add to them neat-herds and shepherds and 
other herders, so that the farmers might have cattle 
for ploughing,’ and the builders oxen to use with the 
farmers for transportation, and the weavers and 
cobblers hides and fleeces for their use.” “It 
wouldn’t be a small city, either, if it had all these.” 
4 ~~ But further,” said I, “ it is practically impossible 
4 to establish the city in a region where it will not 

* Butcher's meat and pork appear first in the luxurious 
city, 373 c. We cannot infer that Plato was a vegetarian. 




oxeddv Tt ddvvarov. "Addvarov yap. Tpoodenoer 
dpa. ert Kal GAdwv, ot e& adAns Toews aves 
Kopicovow dv deirat. Acnoe. Kai pny Kevos 
av in 6 didKovos, pyndev aywv dv éexeivor déovrat, 
map dv dv Kkouilwvra dv av adrots xpela, Kevdos 
»” / Cal a \ \ ” 
amevow. % yap; Aoxet por. Ae? 35) Ta otKot 
A / ¢ a - c /, > AY \ \ 
p47) ovov E€avTots trovety tkavd, addAa Kal ofa Kat 
a > / e Bd) , a / / 
doa éeKelvois wy av d€wvrar. Ae? ydp. [Aedvev 
on yewpy@v TE Kal TOV dM Snpuoupyav det 
nyiv TH woAc. TlAedvwv yap. Kat 3) Kal TOV 
aAAwv diakovwy mov tav TE elcagovTwv Kal e€- 
a€ovtTwv Exaora" otro. dé elow emropou 4 yap; 
Nai. Kat €pTTopv 57) denodpeba. Ildvu ye. 
Kai éav pev ye kata OdAatrav 7 éurropia yiyynran, 

B ovyvdv Kai dAwv mpoodejceras TOV emvaTnudovev 

THs Tept THY OdAaTTav epyacias. Lvyvav pevror. 

XII. Ti de 87) ev airh TH moAe; mas adr Aows 
peeTaduoovoww av dv ExaoTou epydlevrar; av 
67) evexa Kal Kowveviay Tounodpevou moAuw io 
weve Afrov 84, 4 8 és, OTt mwodvres Kal 
@VvOULEVOL. *Ayopa 51) Hptv Kat vopuopa fUp- 
BoXov Tijs aMayiis évera YEVvT}TET AL ek. ToUTOU. 

C Ilavu pev obv. “Av oby Kopicas 6 yewpyos els 

TI dyopav Tl OV Tove, 7 TUS Mos TOV Snpuvoupyar, 
py eis TOV avToV xpovov vai) Tots Seopevous Ta, 
map avrTod adrdgacbar, apynoet THs avrob 
Sypwoupyias Kabijwevos ev dyop@; Ovsapds, 7 
a és, GAN eiolv ot Totro op@vres éavrovs emi 
TV Svaxoviav TaTTovet TavTynV, eV pev ais 
6pb@s oixovpévars mdAcou oxeddv te ot aobeve- 

@ Aristotle adds that the medium of exchange must of 
itself have value (Pol. 1257 a 36). 



need imports.” “Itis.” “ There will be a further 
need, then, of those who will bring in from some other 
city what it requires.” ‘‘ There will.” “ And again, 

if our servitor goes forth empty-handed, not taking 
with him any of the things needed by those from 
whom they procure what they themselves require, 
he will come back with empty hands, will he not?” 
“T think so.” “Then their home production must 
not merely suffice for themselves but in quality and 
quantity meet the needs of those of whom they have 
need.” “It must.” So our city will require more 
farmers and other craftsmen.” “‘ Yes, more.” “‘ And 
also of other ministrants who are to export and import 
the merchandise. These are traders, are they not?” 
“Yes.” ‘We shall also need traders, then.” 
“ Assuredly.” “ And if the trading is carried on by 
sea, we shall need quite a number of others who are 
expert in maritime business.” “‘ Quite a number.” 
XII. “But again, within the city itself how will they 
share with one another the products of their labour ? 
This was the very purpose of our association and 
establishment of a state.’’ ‘‘ Obviously,” he said, 
“by buying and selling.” “ A market-place, then, 
and money as a token® for the purpose of exchange 
will be the result of this.” “‘By all means.” “If, 
then, the farmer or any other craftsman taking his 
products to the market-place does not arrive at the 
same time with those who desire to exchange with 
him, is he to sit idle in the market-place and lose 
time from his own work?” “‘ By no means,” he said, 
“but there are men who see this need and appoint 
themselves for this service—in well-conducted cities 
they are generally those who are weakest? in body 

* Similarly Laws 918-920. 





oTaToL Ta OwpaTa Kal axpetot tt aAXo epyov 
mpatrew. adtod yap Set pévovras adrovs mepi 
Tiv adyopav Ta pev avr’ apyupiov adAAd~acbat Tots 
Tt Seopevois dmodeabat, tots 5€ avti ad dpyupiov 
SiaMarrew, doou Te Séovrat mpiacbar. Adry 
dpa, ap d éyw, 7 _Xpeta KamHAwy niv yeveow 
epmrotet TH 7A. 7 08 KamyAovs Kadoduev Tovs 
mpos Wviv Te Kal mpaow SvaxovodvTas topupevous 
év ayopa, tods Sé€ mAarviras émi tas modes 
EH TOpoUs 5. Ildvy pev ovv. "Ere 8 TWES, ws 
ey@uat, etal Kat aAXAow SiaKovot, ot dy Ta. pev Tis 
Svavoias }47) aave dvoKxowevytor dor, Thy de 
ToO GwpaTos laxdv ikavinv emt Tods mOvOUS Exwouw" 
ot 51) mwdAodvres tiv Tihs ioxvos xpetav, THV 
Tyuny tavtnv puclov Kadodvres, Kéchyvrar, ws 
eyd@par, prcbwrot: y] yap; Tlave pev ody. TTAy- 
pwua 87 mdAeds etow, os €ouKe, Kal puobwrot. 
Aoxet por. *Ap’ ovr, 2) "Adcivarte, 70 Tyiv 

venta 7 mods, wor elvan teA\éa; “lows. ob 

obv av more év adri ein TE Sucaroovvn Kal 7 
aoukia; Kal TiWL dua. eyyevopern av eoxeypeba; 
"Eye per, &$n, ouK evvod, @ LesKpares, et pi 
7rov ev. avr ay TOUTE  xpeia TwWt TH mpos aAAjAovs. 
"AAW lows, Hv & eye, Kadds A€yets* Kal oKemTEov 
ye Kal ovK amoKvynTéov. mp@tov odv oKxepapeba, 
tiva Tpotrov SiatHGovTas of oOUTW TapecKevAc[EVOL. 
GAXo Tu 7 oirév Te TroLodyTEs Kal olvoy Kal imaria 
Kat wvrodjuata, Kal olKkodopnodpevor oikias, 
Ogpovs péev Ta TroAAa yupvol Te Kal avuTddynrot 
épyacovrat, Tob S€ yeysdvos hudieopevor TE Kat 

@ Aristotle (Pol. 1254 b 18) says that those, the use of whose 

oi is the best thing they have to offer, are by nature 


and those who are useless for any other task. They 
must wait there in the agora and exchange money 
for goods with those who wish to sell, and goocjs for 
money with as many as desire to buy.” “ This 
need, then,” said I, “creates the class of shopkesepers 
in our city. Or is not shopkeepers the name we 
give to those who, planted in the agora, serve us 
in buying and selling, while we call those who 
roam from city to city merchants?” “Certainly.” 
“And there are, furthermore, I believe, other 
seryitors who in the things of the mind are not 
altogether worthy of our fellowship, but whose 
strength of body is sufficient for toil ; so they, selling 
the use of this strength and calling the price wages, 
are designated, I believe, wage-earners, are they 
not?” “ Certainly.”’ ““ Wage-earners, then, it seems, 
are the complement that helps to fill up the state.” ¢ 
“I think so.” ‘Has our city, then, Adeimantus, 
reached its full growth and is it complete?” 
“Perhaps.” ‘‘ Where, then, can justice and injustice 
be found in it? And along with which of the con- 
stituents that we have considered does it come into 
the state?” ‘“‘I cannot conceive, Socrates,” he 
said, “unless it be in some need that those very 
constituents have of one another.” ‘ Perhaps that 
is a good suggestion,” said I; ‘““ we must examine 
it and not hold back. First of all, then, let us 
consider what will be the manner of life of men thus 
provided. Will they not make bread and wine and 
garments and shoes? And they will build themselves 
houses and carry on their work in summer for the 
most part unclad and unshod and in winter clothed 
Slaves. Cf. Jesus of Sirach xxxviii. 36 dvev airav ovbx 

olkic@jcterac rds. So Carlyle,and Shakespeare on Caliban: 
“We cannot miss him” (Tempest, t. ii.) 



B brodedeuevor txavds; Opéovrar d€ ex pev Tadv 
KpiGav dAgura oxevaldopevot, ex b€ TV TUpav 
dAevpa, Ta. pev meébavres, Ta d€ pagavres, patas 
yevvakas Kal dptous émt KdAapov twa Tmapa~ 
BadAbpevor | 7 gudra kabapa, KkataKhwevres emt 
orrfsddcov eoTpwwevwv piraré Te Kal p.uppivas, 
evWYncovTar avTOl TE Kal Ta TaLdla, émumvoVTES 
Tod olvov, eoTehavwpuevor Kal dpvodvres Tovs 
Devs, mews Evvovtes _aMijrors, ovdx dmeép THY 

C ovotay _ ToLovpevor Tovs maidas, «dAaBovpevor 
meviav 7) mohepov 3 

XIII. Kat 6 TAavcwv brrodaBesv, "Avev dxsou, 
edn, ws couKas, movets Tovs avdpas éoTunpevous. 
"AdnOA, Hv 8 eyd, Aéyes. emeAabopny ort Kat 
oipov efovow" aAas Te d7jAov ort Kal eAdas Kal 
tupov: Kai BoABods Kat Adyava, ofa 51) €v aypois 
eynpata, enjoovra’ Kal Tpaynwatd mov Tapa- 
Ojcouev adbtots TOv Te otKwy Kal épeBivOwv Kal 

D kudpwr, kai ptpta Kal dnyods amodvobet mpos TO 
Top, petploos dmomivovres: Kal ovrw  Oudyovres i 
Tov Biov ev cipyvyn pera byretas, ws eikés, ynpauot 
teAevt@vtes addov TowodTov Biov Tots exydvots : 
Tapadwaovow. Kal os, Hi de tdv modAw, @ Uaw-— 
Kpates, €$n, Kateoxevales, Ti dy avTas dAXo OE | 
tabdra éydptales; “AANA Hs xpr, ay 8 eyd, & 
DAatcwv; “Azep vopilerat, edn: emt te KAwav 
kataketo0ar, oluat, Tovs wédAovtas px) TaAauTw-— 

E peioOa, Kai amo tparelav Secmvety Kat oya admep 
Kal of vov é€xovor Kat tpayjuara. Elev, fv 3” 

2 gov is anything eaten with bread, usually meat or fish, 
as Glaucon means ; but Socrates gives it a different sense. 
» Cf. Introd. p. xiv. By the mouth of the fine gentleman, 



and shod sufficiently? And for their nourishment 
they will provide meal from their barley and flour 
from their wheat, and kneading and cooking these 
they will serve nobie cakes and loaves on some 
arrangement of reeds or clean leaves, and, reclined 
on rustic beds strewn with bryony and myrtle, they 
will feast with their children, drinking of their wine 
thereto, garlanded and singing hymns to the gods in 
pleasant fellowship, not hecetting offspring beyond 
their means lest they fall into poverty or war?” 
XIII. Here Glaucon broke in: “ No relishes * appar- 
ently,” he said, “ forthe men you describe as feasting.” 
“ True,” said I; “I forgot that they will also have 
relishes—salt, of course, and olives and cheese ; and 
onions and greens, the sort of things they boil in 
the country, they will boil up together. But for 
dessert we will serve them figs and chickpeas and 
beans, and they will toast myrtle-berries and acorns 
before the fire, washing them down with moderate 
potations ; and so, living in peace and health, they 
will probably die in old age and hand on a like life to 
their offspring.” And he said, “ If you were founding 
a city of pigs,” Socrates, what other fodder than this 
would you provide ?”’ ‘‘ Why, what would you have, 
Glaucon?’’saidI. “‘ What is customary,” he replied; 
‘they must recline on couches, I presume, if they are 
not to be uncomfortable, and dine from tables and 
have made dishes and sweetmeats such as are now 

Glaucon, Plato expresses with humorous exaggeration his 
own recognition of the inadequacy for ethical and social 
hilosophy of his idyllic ideal. Cf. Mandeville, Preface to 
able of the Bees: 
A golden age must be as free 
For acorns as for honesty. 




ey, pavOdvw- od médw, ds CovKe, oKOTTODLED 
pdvov dmws yiyverat, ddAd Kal Tpvddoav ddw. 
tows ody ovdé KaKds éyer GKoTODYTES yap Kal 
TovavTny Tay” dv KariSomer THY Te SiKacoodvyv 
Kal dducéav om more rais oAcow eupovran. 7 
fev obv GAnfin adds Boxer por clvar Hv d- 
Ayrvbapev, omep dyes ris’ et 8 ad Bovrcobe 
Kat dreypaivovocy 7A, A.wpnowpev, oddév azro- 
KkwAver. Tatra yap 8 Tw, ds doxe?, odK e&- 
apkécet, 00d adtn % Siavra, d\Aa KXival Te mpoo- 
€oovrat kal tpdzrelat Kat TaAAa oKedy, Kal oysa 37 
Kat pvpa Kal Oupidpara Kal éraipa Kal wéupara, 
ExaoTa ToUTwY mavTodamd: Kal 8) Kal a TO 
mpa@tov edéyouev ovKeTt Ta GvayKata Oeréov, 
oikias Te Kal tudria Kal brodnuata, GAAd THY TE. 
Cwypadiav Kuwytéov Kal THV TrovKiAiav' Kal ypuaov 
kai ehépavra Kal mavrTa Ta ToLabra KTHTEOV. H yap; 

B Nai, edn. Ovdxodv peilova te ad tiv modAw de 

a > u \ ¢ ¢ \ OPPS 4 ¢ / > > 
Tovey; exelvn yap 4 vyrew odKEeTL ixavy, GAA 
” 4 > 4 \ , a Laas a 
75) GyKov eurrAnotéa Kai wAnPous, a odKéeTL TOD 
avaykaiov evexd €oTw e€v tats mdAcow, olov ot TE 
/ e 

Onpevtai mavres, ot Te puyenTtal, moAAoL ev Ot TEpt 

Ta OXHpaTa Te Kal xpwpata, moAAoL Sé ot TEpL 

1 cai thy woxiAlay IL: A omits. 

* On flute-girls as the accompaniment of a banquet ef. 
Symp. 176 £, Aristoph. Ach. 1090-1092, Catullus 13.4. But 
apart from this, the sudden mention of an incongruous item 
in a list is a device of Aristophanic humour which even the 
philosophic Emerson did not disdain: “The love of little 
maids and berries.” 

> ra dvayxaia predicatively, “in the measure prescribed by 


in use.” ‘ Good,” said I, ‘‘I understand. It is 
not merely the origin of a city, it seems, that we 
are considering but the origin of a luxurious city. 
Perhaps that isn’t such a bad suggestion, either. 
For by observation of such a city it may be we could 
discern the origin of justice and injustice in states. 
The true state I believe to be the one we have 
described—the healthy state, as it were. But if it 
is your pleasure that we contemplate also a fevered 
state, there is nothing to hinder. For there are 
some, it appears, who will not be contented with 
this sort of fare or with this way of life ; but couches 
will have to be added thereto and tables and other 
furniture, yes, and relishes and myrrh and incense 
and girls* and cakes—all sorts of all of them. And 
the requirements we first mentioned, houses and 
garments and shoes, will no longer be confined to 
necessities,” but we must set painting to work and 
embroidery, and procure gold and ivory and similar 
adornments, must we not?” “‘ Yes,” he said. “Then 
shall we not have to enlarge the city again? For that 
healthy state is no longer sufficient, but we must 
proceed to swell out its bulk and fill it up with a 
multitude of things that exceed the requirements of 
necessity in states, as, for example, the entire class of 
huntsmen, and the imitators,° many of them occupied 
with figures and colours and many with music—the 

necessity.” Cf. 369 p “the indispensable minimum of a 
city.” The historical order is: (1) arts of necessity, (2) arts 
of pleasure and luxury, (3) disinterested science. Cf. Critias 
110 a, Aristot. Met. 981 b 20. 

© @npevrai and wiyyrai are pppeaneralined Platonic categories, 
including much not ordinarily signified by the words. For 
a list of such Platonic generalizations cf. Unity of Plato’s 
Thought, note 500. 

VOL. I M 161 


povoiKkhy, Towutal Te Kal TovTwy banpérat, parp- 
woot, broKpital, xopeuvtat, épyoAdBou, oKeva@v TE 
C ravrodarav Syuovpyol, Tay te dAAwy Kat Tov 
Tept Tov yuvatKetoy Kdcpov. Kai 82) Kal Svaxdverv 
TAcovwv Senoducba. 7 od SoKet Sejoew mad- 
aywyav, TiT0dv, tpoddv, Koupwrtpidv, Kovpéewv, 
kal ad odotoudv Te Kal payeipwv; er dé Kal 
ovPwrav mpoodencducba: totro yap jiv ev TH 
mpoTépa mercer odK eviy: cde yap ovdev: ev Be 

, \ , = ; , A ~ 
tavTn Kal TtovTov mpoodejce, Senoe dé Kal TOV 
” / , ” bee | 
dAAwy Booknatwv rapmdodAwy, et tis adra edeTar. 
D%» yap; lds yap o¥; Odxobiv Kai iarpdv ev 
, > ff A ~ Nd 7 nn 
xXpelats eoducla todd padAov otTrw Svarrw@pevor 7 
e \ , 4, 
ws TO mpotepov; I[lodd ye. 
XIV. Kai % yepa mov % tore ixavy Tpedew Tovs 
/ \ \ > e ~ ” *” ~ / 
Tore opiKpa 51) €€ ixavis EoTas 7 TAs A€yomev; 
4 v ? ~ ~ ~ / tA ct A 
Otitws, é6n. OdKotv ris TOv tAnsiov xebpas Hyiv 
> , > / c A a , 
amoTunréov, ef ped\Aopev ixavyy e€ew vewew TE 
Kat apodv, Kal éxeivois ad Tis WueTepas, eav Kat 
exeivor ad@ow avtods emt xpnudtwy KrThow 
” ¢ , ‘ cal > , o.. # 
E dzeipov, drepBdvtes Tov THv avayKaiwy dpov; 

TloAAn) dvaynn, ébn, & Ud«pates. TloAcurjoopev 

* Contractors generally, and especially theatrical managers. 

> The mothers of the idyllic state nursed their own children, 
but in the ideal state the wives of the guardians are relieved 
of this burden by special provision. Cf. infra 460 p. 




poets and their assistants, rhapsodists, actors, chorus- 
dancers, contractors 7—and the manufacturers of all 
kinds of articles, especially those that have to do 
with women’s adornment. And so we shall also 
want more servitors. Don’t you think that we shall 
need tutors, nurses wet ” and dry, beauty-shop ladies, 
barbers * and yet again cooks and chefs? And we 
shall have need, further, of swineherds; there were 
none of these creatures in our former city, for we 
had no need of them, but in this city there will 
be this further need; and we shall also require 
other cattle in great numbers if they are to be 
eaten, shall we not?” “Yes.” ‘‘ Doctors, too, are 
something whose services * we shall be much more 
likely to require if we live thus than as before?” 

XIV. “ And the territory, I presume, that was then 
sufficient to feed the then population, from being 
adequate will become too small. Is that so or not ?”’ 
“Tt is.” “ Then we shall have to cut out a cantle’ 
of our neighbour’s land if we are to have enough for 
pasture and ploughing, and they in turn of ours if 
they too abandon themselves to the unlimited 2 acqui- 
sition of wealth, disregarding the limit set by our 
necessary wants.” “ Inevitably, Socrates.’ “‘ We 

© The rhetoricians of the empire liked to repeat that no 
need was known at Rome in the first 200 or 300 years of 

 Illogical idiom referring to the swine. Cf. infra 598 c. 
* xpeias : Greek idiom could use either singular or plural. 
Cf. 410 a; Phaedo 87 c; Laws 630 £. The plural here avoids 
° Cf. 591 p. Natural desires are limited. Luxury and 
unnatural forms of wealth are limitless, as the Greek moralists 
repeat from Solon down. Cf. Aristot. Politics 1257 b 23. 



TO peta todto, ® TAavewv; ) mds Eora; 
Oirws, edn. Kat pnd&y yé mw Adywpev, fv & 
eyw, pnt et Tu Kakov pyr ef ayablov 6 mdXAEpLos 
> 4, > ‘ ~ / id /, 
epyalerat, adAXd Tocobrov povov, Tt moAduov ad 
yéeveow edprykapev, e€ dv pdAvora Tats mdAcou Kal 
idia Kal Synpocia’ Kaka yiyverat, drav ylyvnras. 
Ilavu pev odv. “Ere 57, & hire, peilovos tis 70- 
a ” A > > Ld / a 
374 Aews Sel ovTL apiKp@, GAN GAw oTpatomddw, 6 
efeMov brép Tis ovoias amdons Kal Umép wy viv 
57) e€Aéyouev Siapayetrar rots émodow. Ti S¢; 
> Oo « oN > . , ” > , > 
4 8° ds: adrol ody ikavoi; OvK, ei av ye, Hv 8 
ey, Kal mets amavtes wpodoynoapev Kadds, 
qvika éenAdtTopev THY TOAW* Wyodoyobpev Sé ov, 
el peuvnoat, advvatov éva mroAAds Kad@s épyd- 
leobar téxvas. “AdAnOA Ad€yets, Efn. Ti odv; Fv 
BS éya: % mepi tov moXAcuov aywvia od TexviK?) 
Soxet elvar; Kal pdda, ébn. *H ody rt oxutixijs 
det padrov K7jdecbar 7 TroAEuiKAs; Oddapds. 
"ANN dpa Tov pev aKuToTdpov SiexwAvopev pre 

1 xal léla cat Snuoole II. 

2 The unnecessary desires are the ultimate cause of wars. 
Phaedo 66 c. The simple life once abandoned, war is in- 
evitable. ‘‘ My lord,” said St. Francis to the Bishop of 
Assisi, “tif we possessed property we should have need 
of arms for its defence’ (Sabatier, p. 81). Similarly that 
very dissimilar thinker, Mandeville. Cf. supra on 372 c. 
Plato recognizes the struggle for existence (Spencer, Data 
of Ethics, § 6), and the “bellum omnium contra omnes,” 
Laws 6258. Cf. Sidgwick, Method of Ethics, i. 2: “The 
Republic of Plato seems in many respects sufficiently 
divergent from the reality. And yet he contemplates war as 
a permanent, unalterable fact to be provided for in the ideal 
state."’ Spencer on the contrary contemplates a completely 




shall go to war® as the next step, Glaucon—or what 
will happen?” ‘‘ What you say,” he said. ‘ And we 
are not yet to speak,” said I, “ of any evil or good 
effect of war, but only to affirm that we have further? 
discovered the origin of war, namely, from those 
things from which ¢ the greatest disasters, public and 
private, come to states when they come.” “ Cer- 
tainly.”” “Then, my friend, we must still further 
enlarge our city by no small increment, but by a 
whole army, that will march forth and fight it out 
with assailants in defence of all our wealth and the 
luxuries we have just described.” “ How so?” he 
said; “‘ are the citizens themselves ? not sufficient for 
that?” “Not if you,” said I, “and we all were 
right in the admission we made when we were 
moulding our city. We surely agreed, if you remem- 
ber, that it is impossible for one man to do the work 
of many arts well.” “ True,” he said. ‘‘ Well, then,” 
said I, “ don’t you think that the business of fighting 
is an art and a profession?” “It is indeed,” he 
said. “Should our concern be greater, then, for the 
cobbler’s art than for the art of war?” ‘“ By no 
means.” “‘ Can we suppose,’ then, that while we were 

evolved society in which the ethics of militarism will dis- 
i.¢. as well as the genesis of society. 369 B. 

© & dv: i.e. éx rotrwy é& Sy, namely the appetites and the 
love of money. 

4 Cf. 567 Ee ri 5é; airé@ev. In the fourth century “ it was 
found that amateur soldiers could not compete with pro- 
fessionals, and war became a trade” (Butcher, Demosth. 

. 17). Plato arrives at the same result by his principle 
“one man one task” (370 a-s). He is not here “ making 
citizens synonymous with soldiers’ nor “laconizing”’ as 
Adam says. 
% For the thought of this a fortiori or ex contrario argument 
ef. 421 a. 



yewpyov emyxeupetv elvar dua pnre bhdvrynv pyre 
otkoddpov aGdAd oxvtotdpov,’ iva 8) tiv ro TAS 
oKuTiKhS epyov KaA@s yiyvoito, Kal T&v dAAwv 
evi ExdoTw woatTws ev dmediSomev, mpos 8 
ereptxer Exaotos Kal ef & EueArte TOV dAAwv 
CaxodAny aywv da Biov atro éepyaldpuevos od 
Trapieis Tovs Katpods KaA@s amepydlecbar: Ta dé 
87) wept tov mdAceuov métepov ov mepi mActaToU 
€oTly «bd amepyacbevta; 1 ovTw pddiov, wore 
Kal yewpy@v tis dua modepmiKds ara. Kat 
gkUTOTOUa@V Kal aAAnv Téxvnv vrwodv épyalo- 
fevos, TeTTEvTLKOS b€ 7) KUBeUTIKOS ikava@s ovd 
av els yévorro ut adto TodTo éx maidds emiTy- 
devwv, adda Trapépyw ypwpevos; Kat domida pev 
D AaBav 7 te GAAo THY ToAEuKaY SrAwY TE Kai 
opydvev ablypepov orAutiKhs 7 Twos GAAns waxns 
TOV Kata 7OAEwov ikavds EoTar aywvioTns, TOV 
dé dAAwv dpydvwv oddev oddéva Syprovpyov oddé 
aOAnriv AnPbev trounce, odd’ ota yphoyov TO 
pte THY emorhunv éxdorov AaBovte pyre THY 
pcdernv ixaviy mapacyopéevw; IloAAod yap av, 
4 8° Os, Ta dpyava Hy a&ia. ; 
V. Odxodv, jv & eyd, dow péyotov TO TOV 
E dvAdkwv epyov, tocodtw ayodis te TOV aAAwy 
TAcioTns av ein Kal ad téyvns Te Kal emipedAeias 
peylaTns Seduevov. Olwar eywye, 4} 8 ds. “Ap” 

1 G\Ad oxvToréuoy Il: not indispensable, and A omits. 

2 iva 6% ironical. 

> Cf. 370 B-c. 

* The ironical argument ex contrario is continued with 
fresh illustrations to the end of the chapter. 

4 Cf. on 467 a, 



at pains to prevent the cobbler from attempting to 
be at the same time a farmer, a weaver, or a builder 
instead of just a cobbler, to the end that? we might 
have the cobbler’s business well done, and similarly 
assigned to each and every one man one occupation, 
for which he was fit and naturally adapted and at 
which he was to work all his days, at leisure ® from 
other pursuits and not letting slip the right moments 
for doing the work well, and that yet we are in doubt 
whether the right accomplishment of the business of 
war is not of supreme moment? Is it so easy ° that a 
man who is cultivating the soil will be at the same time 
asoldier and one whois practising cobbling or any other 
_ trade, though no man in the world could make himself 
acompetent expert at draughts or the dice who did not 
practise that and nothing else from childhood? but 
treated it as an occasional business? And are we to 
believe that a man who takes in hand a shield or any 
other instrument of war springs up on that very day 
a competent combatant in heavy armour or in any 
' other form of warfare—though no other tool will 
make a man be an artist or an athlete by his taking 
it in hand, nor will it be of any service to those who 
have neither acquired the science? of it nor sufficiently 
practised themselves in its use?” ‘“‘ Great indeed,” 
he said, “‘ would be the value of tools in that case!” 

XV. “Then,” said I, “ in the same degree that the 
task of our guardians? is the greatest of all, it would 
require more leisure than any other business and the 
greatest science and training.” “ I think so,” said he. 

* For the three requisites, science, practice, and natural 
ability ef. Unity of Plato’s Thought, note 596, and my paper 
on Picts, Medérn, Extornun, Tr. A. Ph. A. vol. xl., 1910. 

* Cf. Thucyd. ii. 40. 
? First mention. Cf. 428 p note, 414 8. 



obv od Kal pdcews emirndetas els avro TO emery} 
Sevpa ; [las 8 ov; ‘Hyérepov 51) épyov av ei, 
ws couKev, eimep oot 7 eopev, exrdEacbar, tives 
Te Kal Trotat dvoets emriTnoevat €ls Tohews puranny. 
“Hyérepov pevrot. Ma Aia, hv & eye, ovK apa 
datAov mpayy.a. npapeba. Spws dé ovK darodet- 
Avatréov, dcov ya av dvvapus mrapeiKy. Od yap odv, 
epn. Oler odv te, jy 8 S eye, Svadepew pvow 
yevvatov oxvAakos eis dvdAakiv veaviokov ed- 
yevods ; To Trotov Aéyets j Ofov d€&dv Té gov det 
avroty Exdrepov elvau mpos aicOnow kal edadpov 
mpos TO aicbavopevov Suokdbew, Kal _loxupov av, 
ev d€n éAdvra. Svapdxeobac. Act yap ody, éon, 
mavrwy tovTwy. Kai wpa avdpeiov ye, elmep €d 
paxetrar. lds 8 ot; *Avdpetos dé elvar dpa 
eOeAjaer 6 pi) Ovproedijs elite tmmos elite KUwv 7 
aAAo or.oby Cadov; 7 ovK evvevonxas, ws dpa ov 
TE Kal avientov Oupds ob TapovTos yuxn aoa. 
m™pos 7avTa dpoBos re €oTt Kad anTTHTOS ; "Ey- 
vevonka. Ta peev Tolvuv Tob odparos olov bet TOV 
dvAaka clvat, djda. Nai. Kat pv Kat ta Tis 
yuxis, ote ye OvpoedH. Kai rodro. as ody, 
Hv 8 éyd, & Tradewv, odk dypio adArjAos TE 
€oovTat Kat Tots aAAows roAirats, OvTES TOLOUTOL 
tas duces; Ma Aia, 7 8 ds, od padiws. “Ada 
C pevrou det ye mpos prev Tods oikelous mpdous adrovs 

* aic@avéuevov: present. There is no pause between per- 
ception and pursuit. 

®’ In common parlance. Philosophically speaking, no 
brute is brave. Laches 196 p, infra 430 B. 

¢ Anger (or the heart’s desire?) buys its will at the price 
of life, as Heracleitus says (Fr. 105 Bywater), Cf. Aristot. 
Eth. Nic. 1105 a 9, 1116 b 23. 




i Mi i 

eS ee 


“ Does it not also require a nature adapted to that 
very pursuit?” ‘‘ Ofcourse.” “ It becomes our task, 
then, it seems, if we are able, to select which and 
what kind of natures are suited for the guardianship 
of astate.” “Yes, ours.” “ Upon my word,” said I, 
“it is no light task that we have taken upon our- 
selves. But we must not faint so far as our strength 
allows.” “‘ No, we mustn’t.” “ Do you think,” said 
I, “ that there is any difference between the nature 
of a well-bred hound for this watch-dog’s work and 
that of a well-born lad?” “ What point have you 
in mind?” “TI mean that each of them must be 
keen of perception, quick in pursuit of what it has 
apprehended,’ and strong too if it has to fight it out 
with its captive.” ‘‘ Why, yes,” said he, “ there is 
need of all these qualities.” “And it must, further, 
be brave ° if it is to fight well.” “‘ Ofcourse.” “‘ And 
will a creature be ready to be brave that is not 
high-spirited, whether horse or dog or anything else ? 

Have you never observed what an irresistible and | 

_ invincible thing is spirit,” the presence of which makes 
_ every soul in the face of everything fearless and un- 
 conquerable?” “Ihave.” “* The physical qualities 
of the guardian, then, are obvious.” ‘‘ Yes.” “ And 
also those of his soul, namely that he must be 
of high spirit.” “‘ Yes, this too.” ‘‘ How then, 
Glaucon,” said I, “ will they escape being savage to 
oneanother@and to the other citizens if this-is to be 
their nature?”’ “ Not easily, by Zeus,” said he. 
“ And yet we must have them gentle to their friends 

— ——— ——— 
— = 

# Cf. Spencer, Psychology § 511: “‘ Men cannot be kept 
unsympathetic towards external enemies without being kept 
unsympathetic towards internal enemies.”’ For what follows 
ef. Dio Chrys. Or. i. 44 R., Julian, Or. ii. 86 D. 



PLATO : . 

elvat, mpos 5é Tods mroAEpiovs yaderods: et S€ p47}, 
od mepywevodaw aAdovs odds Si0Agcat, add” adrol 
pOjcovrat adro Spacavres. “AdnOH, edn. Ti odv, 
jv & ey, momoopev; mo0ev aya mpdov Kal 
peyaArdbupov 700s cdipjoowev; evaytia yap Tov 
Ovpoewet mpacia pdots. Daiverar. *AAAA pevrot 
4 e A “ / ua > A 
ToUTwy OmoTépov av orépntar, dvAak ayalds od 
pa) yevntrar: tadra dé advvdtous éouxe, Kal ovTw 
D 57) EvpBaiver ayabov dvdraxa advvarov yeveobar. 
Kuvdvvever, fn. Kat eyd) amophoas Te Kal ém- — 
4 . ee / ree 4 7 
oxersdpevos Ta Eutpoober, Arxaiws ye, hv 8 eyed, 
> , > ~ A ’ 3-2 
® dire, amopotpev' is yap mpovbeucba eixdvos 
> , ~ / > > / 4 
ameAcibOnpev. lds A€yets; Od evojoapev, ore 
ciaiv dpa poets, olas juets odk wHOnpwev, Exovoas 
ravavria tadra. lod 84; “Ido. pev av tis Ki 
> ” tA > tA aA Mid > e e a 
ev dAdois Cebous, od evr’ av yKioTa ev @ ypets 
E zapeBaddopev 7H dvAakt. olofa yap mov Tav 
yevvaiwy KuvOv, dtr Tobto dice abtav to HOos, 
mpos pev TOds ovvyfets Te Kal yvwpipous ws oldv 
TE mMpaoTtadtovs elvat, mpos S€ Tods ayv@tas 
> , / ~ A »* > 
rovvavtiov. Oida pevror. Toéro pev dpa, qv 8 
ey, Suvardv, Kal od mapa dvow Cyntrodpev Towd- 
tov evar Tov dvAaka. OvdK Eouxev. 
XVI. *Ap’ odv cou Soxe? ert ToOde mpocdetobar 6 
dvAakikds eadpevos, mpos TH Ovpoedet Er mpoo- 

yevéabar dirdcodos tiv dvow; Ids dy; edn: od 

1 4 q: others 6¢ or ye. 

@ The contrast of the strenuous and gentle temperaments 
is a chief point in Platonic ethics and education, Cf. Unity 
of Plato’s Thought, nn. 59, 70, 481. 


‘<¢ I~ * ‘ e* ; a € % i C > 
gue <= eer c 

ond harsh to their enemies ; otherwise they will not 
await their destruction at the hands of others, but 
will be first themselves in bringing it about.” “True,” 
he said. “ What, then, are we to do?” said Il 
“Where shall we discover a disposition that is at 
once gentle and great-spirited ? For there appears 
to be an opposition * between the spirited type and 
the gentle nature.” “There does.” “ But_yet if 
one lacks either of these qualities, a good guardian 
he never can be. But these requirements resemble 
impossibilities, and so the result is that a good 
guardian is impossible.” “‘ It seems likely,” he said. 
And I was at a standstill, and after reconsidering 
what we had been saying, I said, ““ We deserve to be 
at a loss, my friend, for we have lost sight of the 
comparison that we set before ourselves.2” ““ What 
do you mean?” “ We failed to note that there are 
after all such natures as we thought impossible, en- 
dowed with these opposite qualities.” “‘ Where?” 
~ It may be observed in other animals, but especially 
in that which we likened to the guardian. You surely 
have observed in well-bred hounds that their natural 
disposition is to be most gentle to their familiars and 
those whom they recognize, but the contrary te those 
whom they do not know.” “I am aware of that.” 
“ The thing is possible, then,” said I, “ and it is not 
an unnatural requirement that we are looking for in 
our guardian.” “It seems not.” 

XVI. “ And does it seem to you that our guardian- 
to-be will also need, in addition to the being high- 
spirited, the further quality of having the love of 
wisdom in hi ature?” Howso? he said: *T don’t 

> Plato never really deduces his argument from the imagery 
which he uses to illustrate it. 



376 yap evvoed. Kai TooTo, Hv 8 eya, év tots Kuol 
Karowper, 6 Kal dfvov Oavpdoa tod Ompiov. To 
motov; “Ov pev av ton dyvira., xarerraiver, ovdev 
dé Kakov ’ mporreTrovOis?* ov & av yrapysov, aomd- 
Cera, Kav pndev mwomote Um advtoo dyaBov Te- 
mov. 7) ovr Tobro eJavpacas ; Od mdvu, edn, 
pexpt TOUTOV Tpoo€axov Tov vodv: Stu dé mou Spa 
TavTa, dijAov. "Aa pv kopapov ye faiverat TO 

B md8os abrod Tis pvcews Kal ws adnbads diAdcodov. 
Ip 5y} 5 "He, jv & eye, oyu ovddevi adiw pidny 
Kal €x9pav Suaxpiver, 7) 7 TO THY pev katapabety, Ty 
dé dyvojoat KalTou 7@s obK av prropabes etn, 
ovvecet Te Kat ayvola dpilduevov Td Te oixeiov Kaul 
TO dAAST pov ; Ovdsapas, 7 8’ 6s, Omws ov. 
"AAAa perro, elmov eyo, TO ye diropabes Kat 
girscogov tadrov; Tadrov yap, &€dn. Odxodv 
Bappodvres TOG Lev Kal év avOpeirrep, et pee 

Cmpos tods oixelovs Kal yrepipous mpads ee 
eveobar, doe. dirdcodov Kat prrowath avdrov Setv 
elvac Taper, edn. Dirdcogos 87) Kai Dupoedijs 
kat Taxds Kal loxupds juiv thy dvow e€oTra 6 
peAAwv Kados Kayabos eccobar prag Tohews 5 
Ilavrazact pev obv, dn. Odros pev 8) av ovTws 
drapxor Opeyovrar Se 37) Atv odrou Kal mawWev- 

1 rporerovOds II. 

 girdcopoy : etymologically here, as ds ddndas indicates. 
“Your dog now is your only philosopher,” says Plato, not 
more seriously than Rabelais (Prologue): ‘‘ Mais vistes vous 
oneques chien rencontrant quelque os medullaire: c’est 
comme dit Platon, lib. ii. de Rep., la beste du monde plus 

hilosophe.”’ Cf. Huxley, Hume, p. 104: “The dog who 
ees furiously at a beggar will let a well-dressed man pass 
him without opposition. Has he not a ‘ general idea’ of rags 
and dirt associated with the idea of aversion?” Diimmler 



apprehend your meaning.” ‘‘ This too,” said I, “ is 
something dogs and.which 
is worth our wonder in the creature.” “‘ What?” 
“That the sight of an unknown"person angers him 
before he has suffered any injury, but an acquaintance 
he will fawn upon though he has never received any 
kindness from him. Have you never marvelled at 
that?” “TI never paid any attention to the matter 
before now, but that he acts in some such way is 
obvious.” “ But surely that is an exquisite trait of his 
nature and one'that shows a true love of wisdom.*” 
“In what respect, pray?” “In respect,” said I, 
“that he distinguishes a friendly from a hostile aspect 
by nothing save his apprehension of the one and his 
fail ize the other..-How; I ask you,? can 
the love of learning be denied to.a.creature whose 
criterion of the friendly and the alien is intelligence 
and ignorance?” “‘ It certainly cannot,” “hé Said. 
“ But you will admit,” said I, “that the love of 
learning and the love of wisdom are the same?” 
“Thesame,” hesaid. ‘‘ Thenmay we not confidently 
lay it down in the case of man too, that_if he is to | 
be in some sort gentle to friends and familiars he must 
be by nature S Tovar of wisdom and of learning?” | 
“Let us so assume,” he replied. “ The love of wisdom, 
then, and high spirit and quickness and strength will 
be combined for us in the nature of him who is to 
be a good and true guardian of the state.” “ By 
all means,” he said. ‘“‘ Such, then,” I said, “ would 
be the basis* of his character. But the rearing of | 
and others assume that Plato is satirizing the Cynics, but | 
who were the Cynics in 380-370 B.c. ? <a 
» «alroc rs: humorous oratorical appeal. Cf. 360 c kairo. 
* Cf. 343 ©. twdpyo marks the basis of nature as opposed 
to teaching. 


Ojcovras Tiva Tpomov; Kat apa Tl Tmpovpyou muy 
D éorly avTO okoTObat Tpds TO Karwwetv, ov7e evexa 
ndvra oKxoTobpmev, Sixawootynv Te Kal dduKiay Tiva 
tTpomov év moda yiyvera; iva pa) eGyrev ixavov 
Adyov 7) cuxvov Sueftenpev. Kal 6 Tob TAavKcwvos 
ddeAdos Tlavy jeev ovr, edn, eywye mpoodoKk@ 
Tpoupyov spr ets TobTo Tavray TV oxepu. Ma 
Aia, Fv 8 eyes, } pire "Adeipavre, ovK apa 
ageréor, ove” et paKporépa Tuyxdver odaa. Od 
yap ovv. "10 ovr, aotrep ev www. pvdoroyoivrés 
Ere Kal oxoAny ay Aoyw madedwpev Tods 
avdpas. "AdAa xp. : 
XVII. Tis ob  madeia; 7 Xaremrov edpety 
BeArico THs: tm6 Tob ood xpovov «dpy F 
€or dé mov 7 pev emi oopact YUMVAOTUKT, 4 8 
emt poxh poovoiky. "“Eoru yap. *Ap’ obv od povot- 
Kh} mporepov apfoucba masdevovres 7) q YULVAOTURA 
Ids 8’ od; Movorxis 8 eimadv' ibys Adyous, " 
ov; “Eywye. Aoyov dé ditrov eldos, TO pev 
ads, pedd0s 8 erEpov ; Nai. Ilawdevrgov 5 
377 év audorépots, mporepov & év tots pevddeow; Od 



pavOaven, eon, 7s Aéyeus. Od pavOdves, Hv 
eyes, Ort mparov Tots maudious pv0ous _AEYOHEM 
Todto Sێ mov ws TO dAov eizeiv ebdos, Eve SE Kat 

1 elrdv AIL: elrov vy. 

@ Cf. Introd. pp. xxi-xxii, and Phaedr. 276 rz. 

» Plato likes to contrast the leisure of philosophy with 
hurry of business and law. Cf. Theaetet. 172 c-p. 

¢ For the abrupt question cf. 360 5. Plato here prescribe 
for all the guardians, or military class, the normal Gree 
education in music and gymnastics, purged of what he 
considers its errors. A higher philosophic education will 
prepare a selected few for the office of guardians par excellence 



these men and their education, how shall we manage 
that? And will the consideration of this topic 
advance us in any way towards discerning what is 
the object of our entire inquiry—the origin of justice 
and injustice in a state—our aim must be to omit 
nothing of a sufficient discussion, and yet not to 
draw it out to tiresome length?” And Glaucon’s 
brother replied, “Certainly, I expect that this in- 
ay will bring us nearer to that end.” “Certainly, 

en, my dear Adeimantus,” said I, “ we must not 
abandon it even if it prove to be rather long.” “* No, , 
we must not.” ‘ Come, then, just as if we were | 

telling. stories or fables * and had ample leisure,” let | 

must.” x Oe Pe One ee ee 
“XVII. “What,then,is our eve. Or isit hard 

to find a better than that which long time has dis- 
covered?@ Which is, I suppose, astics for the 


body ¢ and for the soul music.” “Tt is”” “And shall 
we not begin education in music earlier than in gym- 
nastics?” “Ofcourse.” “ Andundermusicyouinclude 
tales,do you not?” “Ido.” “And tales are of two 
species, the one true and the other false?” “ Yes.” 
“And education must make use of both, but first 
of the false*?”’ “ I don’t understand your meaning.” 
“Don’t you understand,” I said, “that we begin 
§ by telling children fables, and the fable is, taken as a 
or rulers. Quite unwarranted is the supposition that the 
higher education was not in Plato’s mind when he described 
the lower. Cf. 412 a, 429 p-430 c, 497 cv, Unity of 
Plato’s Thought, n. 650. 

* For this conservative argument cf. Politicus 300 8, Laws 


* Qualified in 410c. joveu? is playing the lyre, music, 
poetry, letters, culture, philosophy, according to the context. 

7 A slight paradox to surprise attention. 




aAnOi; mpdtepov dé pvOows mpos Ta madia 7) 
yupvactors xpapeba. "Eort tabra. Todro 81 
edcyov, Ott povorkhs mpdtepov amréov 7) ‘yupva- 
otikhs. "Opbds, &dyn. Odxobv ofcf’ om “xt 
TavTos Epyou peéytotov, dAAws Te 87) Kal véew Kal 
© ~ c ~ 4, A \ / , ar. 
Bazad@ otwodv; pddota yap 87 Tore mAdTTeTAL 
kai evdverar TUmos, dv dv tis BovAntar evonuy- 
e: oF a A > > > G , , 
vacbar exdotw. Kopidh pev obv. *Ap’ odbv padiws 
oUTW TapyHaomev Tovs emiTVXOVTAaS UmTO TMV e7t- 
TuxdvTwv pvOovs mAacbevtas akovew Tods Traidas 
“~ n~ A 
Kat AauBavew ev tats ypuxats ws ext TO moAd 
> / / > / Ld > A ~ 

evavtias dd0€as éxelvais, ds, emevdav TeAewOdow, 
exew oinodpucba Seiv adrovs; OvS’ omwotiody 
mapyjoouev. IIpadrov 8) ayutv, ws eouxev, €mt- 

“~ ~ A 

C atatyréov tots pvlomovwis, Kal dv pev av Kaddor 
Towawow, eyKpitéov, dv 8 av pH, amoKpiréov’ 
tovs 8° éyxpilévras treicopev tas Tpopods Te Kal 
pnrépas A€yew Tots mascot Kal wAdTTew Tas yYuxas 
adTa&v Tots uvbors todd paAdAov 7) TA C@pata Tats 

/ tA be lot A / \ AX >? r / ¥ 
xepaiv, dv de viv Aéyovat tods toAAods eKBAnTEoV. 
/ / ” > a , > » we 
Iloious 84; &dn. *Ev tots pelloow, qv 8 eyo, 
30) owe B i rods éAd det yap 5 
pv0ots disducba Kai tods eAdtTouvs. Set yap 

Tov adrov TUmov elvat Kal Tabrov dSdvacbat ToUs TE 

D peilous Kai tods éeAdtrovs. 7 ovK oiler; “Eywy’, 

2 Of. Laws 753 £, 765 ©, Antiphon, fr. 134 Blass. 
> Cf. Laws 664 8, and Shelley’s 
“* Specious names 
Learned in soft childhood’s unsuspecting hour,” 

perhaps derived from the educational philosophy of Rousseau. 

¢ The image became acommonplace. Cf. Theaetet. 191 D, 
Horace, Ep. ii. 2. 8, the Stoic rérwois év yvx7, and Byron’s — 
“Wax to receive and marble to retain.” 



whole, false, but there is truth in it also? And we 
make use of fable with children before gymnastics.” 
“That is so.” “‘ That, then, is what I meant by 
saying that we must take up music before gym- 
nastics.” “‘ You were right,” he said. “‘ Do you 
not know, then, that the beginning in every task is 
the chief thing,” especially for any creature that is 
young and tender’? For it is then that it is best 
moulded and takes the impression * that one wishes 
to stamp upon it.” “ Quite so.’ “Shall we, then, 
thus lightly~suffer4-our.children to listen to any 
chance stories.fashioned by any chance teachers 
and so to. take into their minds opinions for the most 
part contrary to those that we-shall-think it desirable 
for them to hold when they are grown up?” “ By 
no Manner of means will we allow it.” “We must 
begin, then, it seems, by a censorship over our story- 
makers, and what they af well we must pass and what 
not, ae ‘the stories on the accepted list 
we will induce nurses and mothers to tell to the 
children and so shape their souls by these stories far 
rather than their bodies by their hands. But most 
of the stories they now tell we must reject.” ““ What 
sort of stories?” he said. “‘ The example of the 
greater stories,” I said, “ will show us the lesser also. 
For surely the pattern must be the same and the 
greater and the less must have a like tendency. 
Don’t you think so?” “I do,” he said; “but I 

# Cf. the censorship proposed in Laws 656 c. Plato’s 
criticism of the mythology is anticipated in part by Euripides, 
Xenophanes, Heracleitus, and Pythagoras. Cf. Décharme, 
Euripides and the Spirit of his Dramas, translated by James 
Loeb, chap. ii. Many of the Christian Fathers repeated his 
criticism almost verbatim. 

VOL. I N 177 


edn: GAN’ obk evvod obdé Tobs jueiLous twas Aéyets. 
Ods ‘Hoiodds TE, elmov, Kal “Opnpos 9 qty édeyerny 
kai ot dAXou mountal. odrot yap mov pvbous Tots 
avOpedrrots ibevdeis ovvtibévtes Eeyov Te Kal A€you- 
aw. Iloiovs 54, 7 8 ds, Kai ti adt@v peupdopevos 
Adyets; “Orrep, Hv 8 eyed, xpy Kal mp@tov Kat 
pddvora péudheobar, dAAws Te Kal edy Tis pw KAADS 

E evdnra. Ti rodro; “Orav eixdln tis Kax@s TO 


Aoyw epi Vedv Te Kal Hpwmwyv olot <low, aorep 
ypadeds pndev eorxdra ype ois av Spova 
Bovhn Oh ypdwbar. Kat ydp, eon, opbds exer 74. 
ye Toadra peppeodar. aAna ms 51) Aeyopev Kal 
Tota ; IIpa@rov pev, Hv & eyo, TO HeyvoTov Kal 
Tept TOV peyloroy peddos 6 etmooy ov Kadds 
epevoato, ws Odpavds te cipydoato & pyar Spacat 
> ‘ € / Lud Ss / e > tA 
avtov “Haiodos, 6 te ad Kpdvos ws éTyswpioato 
ae y \ \ \ ~ , ” \ 4 a 
avrov: Ta dé 57) Tob Kpovov epya Kau man tbo 
Tob vieos, ovd” av et Hv adnOA, @unv Seiv padiws 
ovTw A€éyeobar mpds dppovds Te Kal véovs, adAAd 
pddvora pev ovydobar, <i Sé avayKkn tis Hv A€yew, 
du? azoppyitwv axovew ws ddvyictous, Gvcapevous 
ov xotpov, adAd Te péya Kat dzopov Diya, ows 6 
> / / > ~ A tA : ie 2 
tu ehaxlotous ovveBn axodoa. Kai yap, 7 8 os, 
e / ¢ / \ > / > 
odToi ye of Aoyou xadremol. Kai od Aextér y, 
édnv, @ "Adeiwavre, ev TH Huetépa moAEL, ovdE 
Aextéov véw aKkovovTt, Ws adiuKOv Ta EoxaTa ovdev 

* Theogony 154-181. 

> Conservative feeling or caution prevents Plato from pro- 
scribing absolutely what may be a necessary part of 
traditional or mystical religion. 

¢ The ordinary sacrifice at the Eleusinian mysteries. Cf 


ee ee eS 


don’t apprehend which you mean by the greater, 
either.” “Those,” I said, “that Hesiod * and Homer 

and abe other poets related to us. These, methinks, 
composed false storiés which they told and_still tell 
to mankind.” ~“““Of what sort?” he said; “and 
with what in-them do you find-fault?” “* With 
that,” I said, “ which one ought first and chiefly to 
blame, especi “the-lie is "not a pretty one.” 
“ What is that?” “ When anyone images badly in ) 
his speech the true nature of gods and heroes, like _ 
a painter whose portraits bear no resemblance to | 
his models.” “It is certainly right to condemn 
things like that,” he said; ‘‘ but just what do we 
mean and what particular things?” “‘ There is, 
first of all,’”’ I said, “ the greatest lie about the things 
of greatest _concernment, which was no pretty 
invention of him who told how Uranus did what 
Hesiod says hé did to Cronos, and how Cronos in 
turn took his revenge ; and then there are the doings 
and sufferings of Cronos at the hands of his son. 
Even if they were true I should not think that they 
ought to be thus lightly told to thoughtless young 
persons. But the best way would be to bury them 
in_silence,and—if “there were some necessity” for 
relating them, that only a_very.small_audience 
should be admitted under pledge of secrecy and after 
ee a ig.° but some huge and unprocurable 
victim, to the end that as few as possible should have 
heard these_ tales: ““Whiy;"yes;”" Said he, “ such 
stories are hard sayings.” ““ Yes, and they are not 
to be told, Adeimantus, in our city, nor is it to be 
said in the hearing of a young man, that in doing 

Aristoph. Acharn. 747, Peace 374-375: Walter Pater, Demeter 
and the Pig. 


” \ a 29> eo >? aA , 
adv @Oavpacrov moot, odd’ ad ddikobvTa Tarépa. 
/ \ / > \ 7 ”“ ¢ ~ ¢ 
KoAdlwv mavti tpdmw, GAAa Spain av rep Ve@v ot 
~ > 7 
mp@tot te Kal peyrotor. Od pa tov Aia, 7 8’ ds, 
A a / 
ovd€ adT® por Soxe? émitHdeva elvar Aeyew. Odd 
ye, jv 8 eyw, 70 mapamav, ws Bei Oeots mroXe- 
lol A 
foto te Kal emBovAevovor Kal pdxovTar’ ovdE 
A > a ” a c¢ a \ / \ 
C yap aAnbA- et ye Set Huiv tods péAdovtas THY 
/ > / 
Todw pvddtew atcyiotov vopilew To padiws adAj- 
~ a / 
Aows amrexOdvecbar: moddAob Set yuyavTopaxias Te 
a \ 
pvboroyntéov adtots Kat mrouxtAréov, Kat aAdas 
A \ \ A ~ » hart fA 
exOpas odds Kal mavtodamds Oe@v Te Kal Hpwwv 
mpos ovyyevets Te Kal olkelous abtav: > el 
mws péAdopev treicev, ws oddels muwmoTE OATHS 
ETEpos €Tepw amnxbeTo ovd’ eat. TobTO Gator, 
~ a ‘ \ / 29\ ‘ / 

D tovadra paGdAAov pos Ta mratdia edOds Kal yepovat 
kal ypavat, Kal mpeaBurépous yuyvopevots, Kal TOvS 
TounTas eyyds TovTwy avayKaotéov AoyoToteiv. 
"H de PS) \ ¢ \ ces A rE / cr 

pas d€ deapovs tb7r0 vidos Kat “Hdaiorov pipers 
bo Tatpds, wéAAovTos TH pyTpl TuTTOMErN apv- 
o rs 
veiv, Kat Deopaxias doas “Opunpos memoinkev od 

@ Plato does not sympathize with the Samuel Butlers of 
his day. Cf. Euthyphro 48, Crito 51 8. 

> The argument, whether used in jest or earnest, was a 
commonplace. Cf. Schmidt, Hthik der Griechen, i. 137, 
Laws 941 8, Aeschyl. Humen. 640-641, Terence, Hunuchus 
590 “At quem deum! . . . ego homuncio hoe non facerem.” 
The Neoplatonists met the criticism of Plato and the Christian 
Fathers by allegorizing or refining away the immoral parts 
of the mythology, but St. Augustine cleverly retorts (De Civ. 
Dei, ii. 7): “‘Omnes enim. . . cultores talium deorum... 
magis intuentur quid Iupiter fecerit quam quid docuerit 

¢ Cf. the protest in the Huthyphro 6 8, beautifully trans- 
lated by Ruskin, Aratra Pentelici § 107: ‘“ And think you 
that there is verily war with each other among the gods? 



the utmost wrong he would do nothing to surprise 

anyt ain in punishi is father's ? wrong- 
doings to the limit, but would only be following the 
example of the first-and~gréatest of the gods.>” 

“No, by heaven,” said he, “Ido not myself think 
that they are fit to be told.” “ Neither must we 
admit at all,” said I, “ that gods war with gods ¢ and 
plot against one another and contend—for it is not 
trué e —if we wish our futtre guardians to deem 
nothing more shameful than lightly to fall out with 
one another ; still less must we make battles of gods 
and giants the subject for them of stories and 
embroideries,? and other enmities many and manifold 
of gods and heroes toward their kith and kin. But 
if there is any likelihood of our persuading them that 
no citizen ever quarrelléd with his fellow-citizen and 
that the very idea of it is an impiety, that is the sort 
of thing that ought rather to be said by their elders, 
men and women, to children from the beginning 
and as they grow older, and we must compel the 
poets to keep close to this in their compositions. 
But Hera’s fetterings* by her son and the hurling 
out of heaven of Hephaestus by his father when he 

was trying to save his mother from a beating, and 

the battles of the gods’ in Homer’s verse are things © 

And dreadful enmities and battles, such as the poets have 
told, and such as our painters set forth in graven sculpture 
to adorn all our sane rites and holy places. Yes, and in 
the great Panathenaia themselves the Peplus, full of such 
wild picturing, is carried up into the Acropolis—shall we 
od sey these things are true, oh Euthyphron, right-minded 


@ On the Panathenaic rérios of Athena. 

* The title of a play by Epicharmus. The hurling of 
Hephaestus, J]. i. 586-594. 

? Il, xx. 1-74; xxi. 385-513, 



mapadektéov eis tiv mdéAw, ovT ev drovotats 
TeTroLNpevas ore dvev drrovordy. 6 yap véos ovx 
olds TE Kpivew | O Ti TE drdvoua Kat 6 pH, GAN & 

av THAKOBTOS ob av AdBn év tats dd€ats, dvodnund 

E Te Kal derdorara durct viyvecbar. cv 57) ts tows 


eveca Tept TavTos TolnTéov, a m™para dovovow, 
6 Te KdAMoTa sae ig Tpos ApEeTHv akoveL. 

XVI. "Exe yap, en, A Adyov. adn’ et Tes av 
Kal TAUTA. Epwren ajpas, TabTa drra €or Kal Tives 
ot polo, Tivas dy patyev ; al eye elrov a9) 
"Adciuarte, ovK eopev mrounral eye TE Kal ov ev TO 
mapévre, arn’ oixcorat Toews. oixvorais d€ Tovs 
pev TUTTOUS TpoonKer <idevar, € ev ols det Hvbodoyety 
Tos mountds, map’ ovs e€av Toudow ovK emTpert- 
Téov, ov pay avrots ye Trounréov pvbovs. ’Opbads, 
eon" aA’ adro 51) TodTo, of TUTOL mept Deodoyias 
TivEs ay elev; Tovoide mov Tiwes, Hv O eyes olos 
tuyxavet 6 Beds wv, aet Simov amodoréov, eav TE 
Tls avTOV eV EmTEOL moun edv Te ev pedecu" edy Te ev 
Tpaywoia. Act ydép. Odxodv dyabos 6 6 ye beds @ 
ovTt Te Kal AexTéov ovTws; Tt pays "Aa pv 

ovdéev ye Tav ayaldv BAaBepov. 7 yap; Ov por 
Soxet. *Ap’ odv, 6 pr) BAaBepov, BAdmrea; Odda- 

1 édy re & wédeow IL: om. A. 

* txévoa: the older word for allegory: Plutarch, De Aud. 
Poet. 19 ©. For the allegorical interpretation of Homer in 
Plato’s time cf. Jebb, Homer, p. 89, and Mrs. Anne Bates 
Hersman’s Chicago Dissertation: Studies in Greek Allegorical 
Interpretation. h 

® The poet, like the rhetorician (Politicus 304 pD), is a 
ministerial agent of the royal or political art. So virtually 
Aristotle, Politics 1336 b. 

¢ The ye implies that God is good ex vi termini. 
4 It is characteristic of Plato to distinguish the fact and 


eee aa) eer ee eee 


that we must not admit into our city either wrought 
in ry 7 or without allegory. For the young are 
not able to distinguish what is and what is not 
allegory, but whatever opinions are taken into the 
mind at that age are wont to prove indelible and 
unalterable. For ' which reason, maybe, we should : 

do.car_aimost-that the first_stories that they hear — 
should be so.composed as to bring the f: fairest lessons | 

of wire to-their ears. 
I. “ Yes, that is reasonable,” he said; “‘ but if 

again someone should ask us to be specific and say 
what these compositions may be and what are the 
tales, what could we name?”’ And I replied, “* Adei- 
mantus, we are not poets,” you and I at present, but 
founders of a state. And to founders it pertains to 
know the patterns on which poets must compose 
their fables and from which their poems must not be 
allowed to deviate ; but the founders are not required 
themselves to compose fables.” “ Right,” he said; 
“ but this very thing—the patterns or norms of right 
speech about the gods,“ what-would=they be? ” 
“ Something like this,”’ I said, ‘“* The true quality 
of _God_we must always_surely him 
whether-we-compose in epic, melic, or tragic_yerse.” 
“We must.” ‘ And is not God of course* good in 
reality and always to be spoken of? as such?” “ Cer- 
tainly.” “‘ But further, no good thing is harmful, is 
it?” “I think. not.” “ Can-whatis not harmful 

the desirability of iming i 
by the atacand none omet ‘ So on ase ae 
Below 7d dya@év, followed by 004° dpa . .. 4 Oeds, is in 
itself a refutation of the ontological identification in Plato of 
God and the Idea of Good. But the essential goodness of 
God is a commonplace of liberal and philosophical theology, 
from the Stoies to Whittier’s hymn, *“* The Eternal Goodness.” 


~ A A 
p@s. “O 8é py BAdwrer, Kakov tu moved; Odde 
tobto. “O dé ye pndév Kakov zoel, odd’ av Twos 
” ~ ” Fs Tl ~ / A Ti 8 /, > éX. \ 
ein kaxod aitiov; [lds yap; Ti dé; &déAysov 7d 
> / , ” ” K , Ld > 
ayaldv; Nat. Airiov dpa edrpayias; Nai. Ovdx 
»” , ” One 7 > irae | \ 5 
dpa mdvTwy ye atriov To ayaldv, adAa tev pev bd 
exovtTwy aitiv, TOv dé Kax@v dvairiov. Mav- 
~ / >? 
TADS y’, €fn. OVS’ dpa, Hv S eyed, 6 Aeds, ererd7 
ayaldés, mavrwy av ein altos, ws ot moAXoi Dé- 
> > Xb A A > 6 / ww 
yovow, add’ oXriywr ev Tots avOpesmrots aitios, ToA- 
Adv S€ avaitios: moAd yap eAdtTw tayaba tov 
~ ¢ ~ \ ~ A > ~ ~ y »y 
Kkak@v nuive Kal Tov pev ayabdv odvdéva aAdov 
> / ~ \ ~ ” > ” A cal A 
aitvatéov, Tav dé Kax@v add’ arra det Cyretv ta 
aizia, dAd’ ob Tov Oedv. *AAnOeorara, edn, SoKeis 
/ > ” bi 8° >? 4 > 5 /, + 
pot Aeyeww. OdK dpa, jv 8 eye, amodexréov obre 
‘Opnpov ovr’ dAdov mountod Tavrnv Thy dpaptiav 
rept Tovs Deovds avorrws apapravovtos Kai Aéyovtos 
ws dovoi miBor 
/ > \ v 
Katakelatas ev Avos oder 
~ ” ¢ \ > ~ > A “ ~ 
Knpav EuTrAcior, 6 pev eoPAdv, adrap 6 deAdv- 
kal @ pev av pigas 6 Leds 5B audhorépwr, 

aAdote pév TE KaK@ 6 ye KUperat, GAdoTe 8 

@ 8 av pH, GAN’ axpata ra €repa, 

* Anticipates the proclamation of the prophet in the final 
myth, 617 ©: airia édXouévov" Oeds avalrios. The idea, elabor- 
ated in Cleanthes’ hymn to Zeus, may be traced back to the 
speech of the Homeric Zeus in Od. i. 33 é& fuedy yap dace 
xdx’ €upevat, St. Thomas distinguishes: ‘Deus est auctor 
mali quod est poena, non autem mali quod est culpa.” 

> A pessimistic commonplace more emphasized in the 


eS . 


harm?” “By no means.” “Can that which does 
not harm do any evil?” “ Not that either.” “‘ But 
that which does no evil would not be cause of any 
evil either?” “‘ How could it?” ‘‘ Once more, is 
the good beneficent? *’ “Yes.” “It is the cause, 
then, of welfare?” “Yes.” “Then the good is not 
the cause of all things, but of things that are well it 
is the cause—of things that are ill it is blameless.” 
“Entirely so,” he said. “‘ Neither, then, could God,” 
said I, “ since he is , be, as the multitude say, 
the cause of all things, but for mankind-he-is the 
cause of few things, but of many things not the 
cause.*_ For good things are far fewer ® with us than 
evil, and for the good we must assume no other cause 

than God, but the cause of evil we must look for in 

other things and not in God.” ““* What you say seems 
to me most true,” he replied. “ Then,” said I, “ we 
must not accept from Homer or any other poet the 
folly of such error as this about the gods when he 
says “— 
Two urns stand on the floor of the palace of Zeus and 
are filled with 

Dooms he allots, one of blessings, the other of gifts 
that are evil, 

and to whomsoever Zeus gives of both commingled— 
Now upon evil he chances and now again good is his 
but the man for whom he does not blend the lots, 
but to whom he gives unmixed evil— 
Laws than in the Republic. Cf. Laws 896 ©, where the 
Manichean hypothesis of an evil world-soul is suggested. 
© Il. xxiv. 527-532. Plato, perhaps quoting from memory, 

abbreviates and adapts the Homeric quotation. This does 
not justify inferences about the Homeric text. 



tov d€ Kak?) BovBpworis emt yPova Siav eAatver- 
E 085° ws tapias juiv Leds 
ayalav te Kax@v te rérvKrat. 

XIX. Tv 5€ tév Cpxwv Kai orovddv avyyvow, 
a / 27 =~ 7°? = 
nv 6 Ilavdapos ouvexeev, edv tis PH du” "AOnvas re 
kat Avs yeyovévar, od« emaweaopeba: odde Dedy 
380 €pwv Te Kal Kpiow 1a O€pitds Te Kai Atds: 008’ ad, 
c > / / > / > ta \ / a 
ws AioxtAos Ayer, €atéov aKoveww Tods véous, dt 

Beds pev airiav dieu Bpotots, . 
drav Kak@oa SGpua traynHdynv bern. 

GAN édv tis movh, ev ols Tatra Ta iapPBela eveort, 
ta THs NubBys may 7 Ta WeAombdv 7 7a Tpwika 
4 Te GAXo ta&v TowodTwv, 7 od Beob Epya earéov 
avra Aéyew, 7 «i Beod, eLevpetéov abrois ayedov dv 
viv jucis Adyov Cnrodpev, Kat AeKTEéov, ws 6 pev 
B eds Sixaia te Kal ayaba eipydlero, of 5é dvivavto 
KoAaldpevor. ws dé abAvor pev ot Sixny Biddvte_s, 
iv dé 57) 6 Spdv tabra Yeds, ode éearéov Adyew Tov 
mounTnv: GAN «i pev dre edenPnoav KodAdcews 
Aéyouev, ws aOAvot of Kakol, SiddvTes Se Sixnv 
wdedobvto bro Tob Geo, éaréov: Kax@v 8€ airvov 

? The line is not found in Homer, nor does Plato explicitly 
say that itis. Zeus is dispenser of war in JI. iv. 84. 

> Jl. iv. 69 ff. 

° ow Te kal xpiow is used in Menex. 237 c of the contest of 
the gods for Attica. Here it is generally taken of the theo- 
machy, Jl. xx. 1-74, which begins with the summons of the 
gods to a council by Themis at the command of Zeus. It 
has also been understood, rather improbably, of the judge- 
ment of Paris. 

4 For the idea, ‘‘ quem deus vult perdere dementat prius,” 



Hunger devouring drives him, a wanderer over the wide 

nor will we tolerate the saying that 
Zeus is dispenser alike of good and of evil to mortals.* 

XIX. “ But as to the violation of the oaths® and the 
truce by Pandarus, if anyone affirms it to have been 
brought about by the action of Athena and Zeus, we 
will not approve, nor that the strife and contention ¢ of 
the gods was the doing of Themis and Zeus; nor again 
must we permit our youth to hear what Aeschylus 

A implants the guilty cause in men 

When he ‘wood aitecty Lattoy a house, 
but if any poets compose a ‘ Sorrows of Niobe,’ the 
poem that contains these iambics, or a tale of the 
Pelopidae or of Troy, or anything else of the kind, 
we must either forbid them to say that these woes 
are the work of God, or they must devise some 
such interpretation as we now require, and must 
declare that what God did was righteous and good, 
and they were benefited ° by their chastisement. But 
that they were miserable who paid the penalty, and 
that the doer of this was God, is a thing that the 
poet must not be suffered to say; if on the other 
hand he should say that for needing chastisement 
the wicked were miserable and that in paying the 
penalty they were benefited by God, that we must 
allow. But as to saying that God, who is good, 
ef. Theognis 405, Schmidt, Ethik d. Griechen, i. pp. 235 and 
247, and Jebb on Soph. Antig. 620-624. 

* Plato’s doctrine that punishment is remedial must apply 
to punishments inflicted by the gods. Cf. Protag. 324 B, 
Gorg. 478 ©, 480 a, 505 B, 525 B, infra 590 a-s. Yet there 
are some incurables. Cf. infra 615 £. 



/ , / > \ + 
ddvat Oedv tur yiyveobar ayabdv ovra, d:ia- 
paxeréov Tavrt Tpome pnre Twa Adéyew Taira, év 
TH abrob ToXet, et peAXrew edvounoeobat, pare Twa. 
dcovew, PTE vEedrepov pnte mpecBdrepov, par evo 
weTpe PATE avev pérpov pvlodoyobvra, ws ovre | 
dove, av Acyopeva, el A€youro, ovTe Evpdopa 1 jpiv 
ovTeE ovpdeva aura, adrois. Lepumdos Gol «iu, 
épn, TovTOV TOO vouov, Kal por apéeaket. OdTos 
pev Toivuv, hv 8 éyw, els av ein TOV trept Beods 
vow TE Kal TUTWY, ev @ Sejaer Tos A€yovtas 
Aéyew Kai Tods TowobdvTas Trovety, pt) TAVTWY aiTLov 
tov Bedov adda ta&v ayabdv. Kai pad’, éfn, azo- 
/ \ \ ¢ tA ow Ss / ‘ 
Dxpyn. Ti dé 5) 6 Sevrepos b5€; dpa yonta Tov 
Qeov oter elvar Kai ofov && émBovdts davralecBat 
” > »” 97 \ A a / 
adArote év aAXas id€ats, ToTé pev adrov yuyvd- 
‘ arr 4 \ € ~ t6 > AA A 
pevov Kal aAAdtrovra 70 adtob eldos eis moAXds 
popdds, Tote dé Huds aratvra Kat mowbvtTa mepi 
abTob To.abra Soxeiv, 7 amAoby Te elvan Kal mavTwV 
@ ~ ¢ a 907 > / > ” mv 
Kora THs Eavrod idéas exBaivew; Ov« EXO» egy, 
viv ye ovtws eimeiv. Ti d€ 7dde; ouK dvdyKn, 
clrep tt e€loTaiTo Tis avrod idéas, 7) adto bd’ 
E €avtobd pelictacba 4 bm’ aAdov; ’Avaynn. Od«- 
obv vo pev dddAov Ta apiota EexovTa HKLOTA 
dAAowwbrai Te Kal KivEetTaL; olov G@ua bro otTiwy 

@ Minucius Felix says of Plato’s theology, Octav. chap. xix: 
“Platoni apertior de deo et rebus ipsis et nominibus oratio 
est et quae tota esset caelestis nisi persuasionis civilis non- 
nunquam admixtione sordesceret.”’ 

> The two methods, (1) self-transformation, and (2) pro- 
duction of illusions in our minds, answer broadly to the two 
methods of deception distinguished in the Sophist 236 c. 

° Cf. Tim. 508, Cratyl. 4398. Aristotle, H. A. i. 1. 32, 



becomes the cause of evil to anyone, we must con- 
tend in every way that neither should anyone assert 

i i e well governed, nor 
anyone hear it, neither younger nor-older,-neither 
tell métré or without metre; for neither 
would the saying of such things, if they are said, be 
holy, nor would aoe be profitable to us or concordant 
wi emselvés.”* ““T cast my vote with yours for this 
law,” he said, ‘‘ and am well pleased withit.” ‘ This, 
then,” said I, “ will be one of the laws and patterns 
concerning the gods * to which speakers and poets will 
be required to conform, that God is not the cause of 
all things, but only of the good.” “ And an entirely 
satisfactory one,” he said. “‘ And what of this, the 
second. Do you think that God is a wizard and 
capable of manifesting himself by design, now in one 
aspect, now in another, at one time ® himself changing 
and altering his shape in many transformations and 
at another deceiving us and causing us to believe 
such things about him; or that he is simple and 
less likely than anything else to depart from his own 
form?” “I cannot say offhand,” he replied. “ But 
what of this: If anything went out from¢ its own 
form, would it not be displaced and changed, either 
by itself or by something else?” “* Necessarily.” 
“Is it not true that to be altered and moved? by 
something else happens least to things that are in 
the best condition, as, for example, a body by food 

applies it to biology: rd -yervatéy éor: 7d wh eftordpevor ex Tijs 
aitod gicews. Plato’s proof from the idea of perfection that 
God is changeless has little in common with the Eleatic 
argument that pure being cannot change. 

The Theaetetus explicitly distinguishes two kinds of 
motion, qualitative change and motion proper (181 c-p), but 
the distinction is in Plato’s mind here and in Cratyl. 439 r. 



Te Kal moT@v Kal TOvenv, Kal mav pordv b70 
ctAjoedy Te Kal ave puny Kal Trav ToovTaw ma8)- 
pedtwv, od TO byveorarov Kal toxuporarov WKLora, 
381 adAovodrar ; Ids 5” ov; Foxny be od THY av- 
Spevorarny Kal dpovyrorrdeny nKior av te e€wber 
mabos Tapagere Te Kal dAAovoscever ; Nai. Kat 
unv mov Kal Ta ye EvvOera mavra oxedn TE Kal 
olxodopnwara Kal duprecpara? KaTa Tov adrov 
Adyov, Ta €D eipyaopeva Kal €d €xovTa, b70 xpdovov 
Te Kal TOV GAAwy Tabnudrov Tora. dMovobra.. 
"Eore 57) tatra. Ildv 81 76 Kadds exov 7 pvoer 7] 7 
B téxvn 7) duporépors edaxtorny peraBodny b om  dAAou 
evdexeT au, “Eouxev, “AMa pny 6 Beds y€ Kal Ta 
Tod Oeot maven dipLora. éxer. Ids 5° ov; Tadry 
pev 57) yKLoTa dv mroAAds popdas tayou 6 eds. 
"“Hrwora dfra. 

XX. *AAN dpa adros atrov peraBddAot av Kat 
aAXowwt; A7jAov, edn, drt, eiep aAAowodrar. Ild- 
Tepov ovv emt To BéeATiSv Te Kal KaAALOV weTaBaAret 
€avTov 7) emi TO xetpov Kal TO alayiov éavTod; 

C ’Avdykn, &¢n, emi 70 xelpov, elmep adAowobrar’ ov 
yap tov evded ye dyoouev tov Bedv KdddAous 7 
apeThs elvar. “OpOdrara, jv 8° eyed, A€yeus* Kal 
oUTws e€xovros Soke dv Tis aot, ® *Adeiuavrte, 
ExwV adTOV xYEelpw TroLety Omynodv 7) Oedv H avOpa- 
mwv; ~“Addvvatov, édn. *Addvvatov dpa, edn, Kal 
Oe brew adrov adAovobv, add’, ws eouxe, KaA- 
Atoros Kai dpiotos wv eis TO SuvaTov ExaoTos 

So) eae 

1 kal dudiéouara IL: om. A. 

pm et ha 
Ves "Gee = 

2 Cf. Laws 765 ¥. 
> rapdiee suggests the drapatia of the sage in the later schools. 




and drink and toil, and plants* by the heat of the 
sun and winds and similar influences—is it not true 
that the healthiest and strongest is least altered? ” 
# inly.” ‘‘ And is it not the soul that is bravest 
and most intelligent, that would be least disturbed ® 
and altered by any external affection?” “ Yes.” 
“ And, again, it is surely true of all composite im- 
plements, edifices, and habiliments, by parity of 
reasoning, that those which are well made and in 
good condition are least liable to be changed by time 
and other influences.” “‘ That is so.” “It is uni- 
versally ° true, then, that that which is in the best 
state by nature or art or both admits least alteration 
by something else.” “‘So it seems.” “‘ But God, 
surely, and everything that belongs to God is in 
every way in the best possible state.” ““ Of course.” 
“ From this point of view, then, it would be least of 
all likely that there would be many forms in God.” 
“ Least indeed.” 

XX. “But would he transform and alter himself?” 
“ Obviously,” he said, “if he is altered.” “Then 
does he change himself for the better and to some- 
thing fairer, or for the worse 4 and to something uglier 
than himself?” ‘It must necessarily,” said he, 
“ be for the worse if he is changed. For we surely 
will not say that God is deficient in either beauty or 
excellence.” ‘‘ Most rightly spoken,” saidI. “And 
if that were his condition, do you think, Adeimantus, 
that any one god or man would of his own will worsen 
himself in any way?” “Impossible,” he replied. “It 

is 2 agree ‘even for 4 g0d-to-wish to 
alter f, but, as it appears, each of them being 

* xav 54 generalizes from the preceding exhaustive enum- 
eration of cases. Cf. 382 £, Parmen. 139 a. 
# So Aristot. Met. 1074 b 26. 




abtav péver del ards ev TH avTod Lopdi. 
“Araga, RE _avdynen ewouye doxe?. Myéets dpa, 
D iv & eya, & dpiore, Aeyérw piv Tov wounTtav, ws 

Geot Eetvoicw eorxdtes aAAodaTrotat 
mavroto. TeAefovres emiotpwh@or 7oAnas* 

pnde IIpwrews kal O€rios Karaipevdéobr pndeis, 
pnd? ev Tpaywdiars pnd” év Tots dows Tounpacw 
cicayérw “Hpav 7AAowpevny ws i€pevay ayel- 

*Ivaxou ’Apyeiov totapod mao Biodapois- 

E Kal aMa Tovabra moAAd ft) mpi pevdéobucav: pnd? 
ad bo ToUTwY dvarrevBopevan ai unrépes TA maudia 
exdeyarovvTev, Aéyovoat Tovs pvbous KaKds, Ws 
apa Qeot twes repiepxovTar viKTwp ToAAois E€vous 
Kal tavTodaTots idaAdpevor, iva pa) da pev ets 
Beods BrAacdnydow, aya be Tovs Traidas arrepyt: 
Covrae SevAorepous. My) yap, egy. "AM’ dpa, 7 
5° ey, adroit pev of Geot eiow olor a7; weTaPadAew 
Hpiv d€ mrovodar Soxeiv odds nosmnerene daivecbat 
eLavat@vres Kat yontevovtes; “lows, épy. Ti 

382 dé; Fv & eyo: pevdecbar Geos eOéAor av 7 Adyw 
 epyw ddvragpa Tporetveny ; Od« olda, 4 8 és. 
Ovx olaba, 7 Hv & eyes, OTL TO ye ws adnbds iped8os, 
et oldv te Tobro «imeiv, mavres Deoit Te Kal av- | 
Opwrot pucotow; Ids, éfn, eyes; OtTws, fv | 
8° eye, ort TH Kupwwrdtw mov éavTav evdeoGat 

2 Of. Tim. 42 © éuevev, which suggested the Neoplatonic — | ; 
and Miltonic paradox that the divine abides even when it 
goes forth. 


the fairest and best possible abides ¢ for ever simply in 
his own form.”_—“*> 

ae _\Arrabsolutely necessary conclusion 
to my thinking.” “No poet then;”T said; “my good 
friend, must be allowed to tell us that 
~The gods, in the likeness of strangers, 
Many disguises assume as they visit the cities of mortals.” 
Nor must anyone tell falsehoods about Proteus ° 
and Thetis, nor in any tragedy or in other poems 
bring in Hera disguised as a priestess collecting alms 
‘for the life-giving sons of Inachus, the Argive 
stream.? And many similar falsehoods they must 
not tell. Nor again must mothers under the influence 
of such poets terrify their children’ with harmful 
tales, how that there are certain gods whose appari- 
tions haunt the night in the likeness of many strangers 
from all manner of lands, lest while they speak evil 
of the gods they at the same time make cowards of 
the children. ” “They must not,” he said. “ But,” 
said I, ‘‘ may we suppose that while the gods them- 
selves are incapable of change they cause us to 
fancy that they appear in many shapes deceiving and 
_ practising magic upon us? 2?” “ Perhaps,”’ said he. 
“Consider,” said I; ‘would a god wish to deceive, 
or lie, by presenting in either word or action what 
is only appearance 2” “T don’t know,” said he. 
“ Don’t you know,” said I, “ that thetye ritable lie, ) 
if the expression is permissible, is a thing that~all” 
gods and men abhor?” “ What do you mean?” 
he said. “ This,” said I, “ that falsehood in the most 
» Od. xvii. 485-486, quoted again in Sophist 216 s-c. Cf. 
Tim. 41 a. 
¢ Cf. Od. iv. 456-8, Thetis transformed herself to avoid 
the wooing of Peleus. Cf. Pindar, Nem. iv. 

@ From the Zavrpiac of Aeschylus. 
* Rousseau also deprecates this. 

VOL, I i¢) 193 


Kal mepl Ta KUpLOTaTa ovdels éxav eOehet, aAAd. 
mdvTwv pdAvora. poPetrat exel avo KexTHobar, 
Ode viv To, 48 és, pavOdve. Otter yap Ti pe, 
Bedny, oemvov déeyew: eyd dé dé Yo, Ort TH puxh 
mept Ta OVTAO pevdeo8ai Te Kal epedoban kai 
dua.) elvau xal evrabia exew TE Kal KexTHobae 
TO weddos mavres jKvora av S€€awto Kal picovar 
pddwora atto ev TH TowovTe. IloAv ye, én. 
“AMA pnv opOdrara y’ av, 6 viv ou edeyor, * TOTO 
as dAn Gas petdos Kadotro, 7 ev Th poxh & dyvova. 
a) Tob eevopevou' eel TO ve év Tots Adyous pt 
pnpd TL TOO ev TH puxh éort mabjwaros kal 
Cu UoTepov yeyoves etdwov, od mavu axpatov eddos. 
7 ody ovTws; Ilavu yey ovr. 

XXI. To pev 87 T@ OvTt iped8os ov povov bd 
Oedv adAa Kal bar’ avO perme pucetrat. Aoxet pot. 
Ti be 57); 73 ev Tots Adyots ped5os mOTE Kal TO 
XpnoyWLov, dare pay) a&vov elvat ploous ; ; dp” od 
mpos Te Todvs ToAeuiovs, Kat TOV Kadovpevwv 
dirwv 6rav dd paviav q Twa dvovav kaxov Tt 
4 etn mparrew, tote dmrorporijs EveKa ws 
D dappakov Xpnoypov ylyverar; Kal év als viv 81) 
eAéyopev tats pvboroytats dua TO 7) eldevat, ony 
Tadnbes € exet TeEpt TOv TraAa@v, dpopovodvres TO 
adn Get 70 weddos 6 7 pddvora. ovr Xproypov 
Tovodpev ; Kat paha, 7) 3° és, oUTws EXEL. Kara 
ti 8 obv TovTwWY TO "bed TO eddos xpHoysov; 

* Cf. Aristot. De Interp. i. 12 éore uev ody ra év TH pwvy Tay 
év TH YuxG TaOnudrwv ciuBora. Cf. also Cratyl. 428 p, infra 
535 2, Laws 730 c, Bacon, Of Truth: ‘* But it is not the 
lie that passes through the mind but the lie that sinketh in 

and settleth in it that doth the hurt.” 
> Cf. Phaedr. 245 a wupla r&v madadv epya Kocmoica rods 



vital part of themselves, and about their most vital 
concerns, is something that no one willingly accepts, 
but it is there above all that everyone fears it.” “I 
don’t understand yet either.” ‘ That is because you 

me of some grand meaning,” I said; “ but 
what I mean is, that deception in the soul about 
realities, to have been deceived and to be blindly 
ignorant and to have and hold the falsehood there, is 
what all men would least of all accept, and it is in 
that case that they loathe it most of all.” ‘‘ Quite so,”’ 
he said. “ But surely it would be most wholly right, 
as I was just now saying, to describe this as in very 
truth falsehood—ignorance namely in the soul of 
the man deceived. For the falsehood in words is a 
copy“ of the affection in the soul, an after-rising image 
of it and not an altogether unmixed falsehood. Is 
not that so?” “ By all means.” 

XXI. “ Essential falsehood, then, is hated not only 
by gods but by men.” “I agree.” “But what of 
the falsehood in words, when and for whom is it 
serviceable so as not to merit abhorrence? Will 
it not be against enemies? And when any of 
those whom we call friends owing to madness or 
folly attempts to do some wrong, does it not then 
become useful to avert the evil—as a medicine ? 
And also in the fables of which we were just now 
speaking owing to our ignorance of the truth about 
antiquity, we liken the false to the true as far as we 
may and so make it edifying.?’’ ‘‘ We most certainly 
do,” he said. ‘ Tell-me;-then,_on which of these 
grounds falsehood would be—serviceable to God. 
éxvyvyrouévous maidever, Isoc. xii. 149 and Livy’s Preface. 
For xpjemov cf. Politicus 274". We must not infer that 

Plato is trying to sophisticate away the moral virtue of 



mOTEpoV Sta TO }41) etdevau 7a. maNavd. adopodv av 
pevdorro ; Tedotov pévr’ av <i, édn. Tlounrijs 
pev apa wevdis ev Jed odk ev. OU poe Soxe?. 
E’AMad sedis Tovs éxOpods pevdorro; TloAAod ye 
det. “Aa bv otelev dvovay 7 paviav ; "AM 
oddeis, eon, TOV dvonrey Ka pawwopevav Oeogirrjs. 
Ovx dpa €orw ob eveka av Beos pevdorto. Od« 
éorw. Ildvrn dpa arxevdes To Saydviov re Kat 
TO Oeiov. Ilavramace pev pes éy). Komdij apa. 
6 Beos drhobv Kal adnbes év Te epyw Kal ev Adyw, 
kal ovTe avTos peIiorarae ovre dAXous eCanarg, 
ovTe kara, pavracias ouTe Kara _ Adyous oUTe KaTa 
383 onpreteny Topmas, oul’ imap ovr’ 6vap. Odrws, én, 
Epouye Kal ad7t@ daiverat ood Aéyovtos. Lvyxwpeis 
apa, epny, TOUTOV Sevrepov TUmov elvau ev 6 det i rept 
Oedv Kal Aێyew Kal mroveiv, as penjre avrovs yonras 
ovras TO peraBarew € éavTovs pnTE Huds wevdect 
Tapdyew ev Ay 7 7 ev Epyw; Lvyxwpa. HodAa 
dpa ‘Oprpov emavoovres GMa. tobro ovK e7- 
aweoopeba, Thv Tob évuTtviou mopearny ake Awos 
7@ “Ayapepvove: ovde Aioxviov, 6 otav pH 4 O€zis 
B tov ’Amo\w ev tots mes ydois adovTa 

evdaretabar Tas éas edmatdias, 
voowv 7 ameipous Kal pakpaiwvas Bious. 
EvpravTd 7 ecizav Oeodireis Euas tUYas 
maav’ erevdyunoev, evOvpadv eye. 
> \ ‘ / - > \ /, 
Kaya TO DoiBouv Oeiov ayevdes ordua 
HAmbov elvar, pavtixH Bpdov téxvy. 

@ Generalizing after the exhaustive classification that 

* Kit 1-34. This apparent attribution of falsehood to 
Zeus was an “ Homeric problem” which some solved by a 



Would he because of his ignorance of antiquity make 
false likenesses of it?” ‘“‘ An absurd supposition, 
that,” he said. ““ Then there is no lying poet in 

.’ “T think not.” “ Well then, would it be 
through fear of his enemies that he would lie?” 
“ Far from it.” “‘ Would it be because of the folly 

or madness of his friends?” “Nay, no fool or | 

madman is a friend of God.” ‘‘ Then there is no 

motive for God to.deceive.” “None.” “So from| 
every point of view? the divine and the divinity are 

free from falsehood.” “By allmeans.” “‘ Then God 
is altogether simple and true in deed and word, and 
neither changes himself-nor deceives others by 
visions or words or the sending of signs in waking 
or in dreams.” “ I myself think so,” ae 

in this as our second norm or canon for speech 

and poetry about the gods,—that they are neither 
wizards in shape-shifting nor do they mislead us | 

by falsehoods in words or deed?” “I concur.” 

“ Then, though there are many other things that we 

praise in Homer, this we will not applaud, the 
sending of the dream by Zeus? to Agamemnon, nor 
shall we approve of Aeschylus when his Thetis ¢ avers 
that Apollo, singing at her wedding, ‘ foretold the 
happy fortunes of her issue "— 

Their days prolonged, from pain and sickness free, 
And rounding out the tale of heaven’s blessings, 
Raised the proud paean, making glad my heart. 
And I believed that Phoebus’ mouth divine, 

Filled with the breath of prophecy, could not lie. 

change of accent from dldoyuev to d:déuer. Cf. Aristot. Poetics 
1461 a 22. 

* Cf. Aeschyl. Frag. 350. Possibly from the"“OrAwy xplois. 

said, ““ when ° 
I hear you say it.” ‘“‘ You concur then,” I said, ' 


e > 2.8 ¢ a + et 2 f , 
6 8’, adros tuvdv, adros ev Oolvyn rape, 
avros Tad’ eirav, adros e€oTW 6 KTAaVWV 
Tov maida TOV eudv. 


C érayv tis tovadra A€yyn wept Oedv, xaAerravodpev Te 
Kal xopov od SdSdcopev, o¥d€ Tods SidacKddous 
edgopuev emt madeia ypnola. tOv véewv, ei peéA- 
Aovow Huiv of dvAakes DeooeBeis te Kai Deion 

/ of 9 9 > tA : ey rv - #6 
yiyvecbar, Kal? doov avOpamm emt mActorov ofov 
te. Ilavraraow, &fn, eywye tods tUmovs Tov- 
TOUS OVYXWPa Kal Ws vdpos av xpwunv. . 




But he himself, the singer, himself who sat 
At meat with us, himself who promised all, 
Is now himself the slayer of my son. 

When anyone says that sort of thing about the 
gods, we shall be wroth with him, we will refuse him 
a chorus, neither will we allow teachers to use him 
for the education of the young if our guardians are to 
be god-fearing men and god-like in so far as that 
is possible for humanity.” ‘‘ By all means,” he said, 
“ I accept these norms and would use them as canons 
and laws.” 





I. Ta pev 8) wept Beods, Hv 8 eyo, rovadr 
evOds ék maidwy tots Beovs Te Tipnocover Kal 
yovéas THv Te GdAjAwy diAiav pr) mept opiKpod 
A ‘ / > ww > ~ c a 
mounoopevots. Kai olwai y’, édn, opbds apiv 
daivecbar. Ti dé 54; ef péAdovow elvar avdpetor, 
dp’ od tatra te extéov Kal ofa adrods movnoat 

B ¢ \ Ad. 5 5 , Wee ‘ 2. 

yevéobar avdpeiov, éxovra év att® tobdro 70 Seiya; 
Ma Aia, 7 8’ és, odk éywye. Ti dé; rav “Awdov 
Hyovpevov elvai Te Kal Sewa elvar olet Twa Bavarou 
ade éceoOar Kal ev tals pdyats alpjoecbar po 
nT™ms te Kal Sovdeias Oavarov; Oddapds. Act 
54, Ws €ouxev, Huds emvorareiv Kal mepl TovTwr 
TOV pv0wv tots emuyerpotar Adyew, Kai detobas p27) 
Aowopetvy atABs ottTws Ta ev “Aidov, adAa paAdAov 

C éraweiv, ws ovr’ adnOA A€yovtas ovr’ wPpéeAysa 

Tois peAAovor paxipors Eceobar. Act pévrot, dy. 

2 We may, if we choose, see here a reference to the virtue 
of piety, which some critics fancifully suppose was eliminated 
by the Huthyphro. Cf. Unity of Plato’s Thought, note 58. 

» For the idea that death is no evil cf. Apology, in fine, 


I. “ Concerning the gods then,” said I, “ this is the 
sort of thing that we must allow or not allow them to 
hear from childhood up, if they are to honourthe gods* 
and their fathers and mothers, and not to hold their 
friendship with one another inlightesteem.” “ That 
was our view and I believe it right.” “‘ What then 
of this? If they are to be brave, must we not 
extend our prescription to include also the sayings 
that will make them least likely to fear death? 
Or do you suppose that anyone could ever become 
brave who had that dread in his heart?” “No 
indeed, I do not,” he replied. “ And again if he 
believes in the reality of the underworld and its 
terrors,’ do you think that any man will be fearless 
of death and in battle will prefer death to defeat 
and slavery?” “ By no means.” “Then it seems 
we must exercise supervision ¢ also, in the matter of 
such tales as these, over those who undertake to 
supply them and request them not to dispraise in 
this undiscriminating fashion the life in Hades but 
rather praise it, since what they now tell us is neither 
true nor edifying to men who are destined to be 
warriors.” “‘ Yes, we must,” he said. ‘* Then,” 

Laws 727 v, 828 p, and 881 a, where, however, the fear of 
hell is approved as a deterrent. 
© Cf. 377 8. 




> , “A 
Egadeibowev dpa, qv 8 ey, amd todd. Tod 
v > ~ 
Evrous ap€dpevor madvTa TA TOLadTaA, 

Bovdoiuny x’ éemdpovpos édv Ontrevénev ddAw 


avdpi trap’ akAjpw .. . 

n” ~ 

 maow vexveco. katadOinevorow avaccew: 
Kal TO. 

_ ay \ - 

oixia 5€ Ovnroto. Kat abavatovcr davein 

opepdare’, edpwdevta, TA TE OTUyéovar Heol TeEp" 

n~ / 

@ morro, Hh pa Tis éore Kal civ "Atdao dSdporor 


yx?) Kal eldwrov, arap dpéves odk Eve Tapmray 
Kal TO 

” ~ \ A \ 34 

olw memvicba, Tal dé axial alacova* 

# Spoken by Achilles when Odysseus sought to console 
him for his death, Od. xi. 489-491. Lucian, Dialog. Mort .18, 
develops the idea. Proclus comments on it for a page. Cf, 
Matthew Arnold’s imitation in “* Balder Dead”: 

Hermod the nimble, gild me not my death! 
Better to live a serf, a captured man, 
Who scatters rushes in a master’s hall 
Than be a crown’d king here, and rule the dead; 
Lowell, * After the Burial”: 
But not all the preaching since Adam 
Has made death other than death ; 
Heine, Das Buch Le Grand, chap. iii.; Education of Henry © 
Adams: “ After sixty or seventy years of growing astonish- 
ment the mind wakes to find itself looking blankly into the 
void of death . . . that it should actually be satisfied would — 
prove ... idiocy.” Per contra, cf. Landor: 
Death stands beside me whispering low 
I know not what into my ear. 
Of his strange language all I know 
Is, there is not a word of fear; 



said I, “ beginning with this verse we will expunge 
everything of the same kind : 

Liefer were I in the fields up above to be serf to another 
Tiller of some poor plot which yields him a scanty sub- 
Than to be ruler and king over all the dead who have 
and this : 

Lest unto men and immortals the homes of the dead be 
Horrible, noisome, dank, that the gods too hold in abhor- 

Ah me! so it is true that e’en in the dwellings of Hades- 
Spirit there is and wraith, but within there is no under- 

and this : 

Sole to have wisdom and wit, but the others are shadowy 

and the passage of the Cratylus 403 p, exquisitely rendered 
by Ruskin, Time and Tide xxiv.: ** And none of those who 
dwell there desire to depart thence—no, not even the sirens; 
but even they the seducers are there themselves iled, 
and they who lulled all men, themselves laid to rest—they 
and all others—such sweet songs doth death know how to 
sing to them.” 

> Il. xx. 64. deicas wh precedes. 

¢ Jl. xxiii. 103. The exclamation and inference (A4) of 
Achilles when the shade of Patroclus eludes his embrace in 
the dream. The text is endlessly quoted by writers on 
Ps fae origins and dream and ghost theories of the origin 
of the belief in the soul. 

@ Od. x. 495. Said of the prophet Teiresias. The pre- 
ceding line is, 

Unto him even in death was it granted by Persephoneia. 
The line is quoted also in Meno 100 a. 



yuy? 5° ex pebéwv mrapévn “Aiddade BeByxet, 

, / a > 3 a \ 
dv ToTpOV yoowoa, Azoba" avdporira Kal 7Bnv* 

387 Kal TO 

\ A \ / 2h , 

yuy7 Se Kata xJovds, nite Kamvos, 
” “~ 


¢ 2 2 ~ » / 
ws &° Gte vuKrepides pvx@ avtpov Oearreciovo 
tpilovoat moTéovTat, eel KE TIS ATOTECHOW 
¢ =~ ? , be > 2 / ww 
opabod ex mérpns, ava 7 aGAAjAnow ExovTat, 
Os al tetpuyvias du’ jeoav. 

Bratra kal 7a Towra mavra trapaitnoducda 
¢ , ‘ ‘ + ‘ \ aX / 
Opnpov te Kal tods aAAovs Trountas py) XaAemrat- 
vew av Suaypadwpyev, ody Ws ov ToinTiKa Kat 
€ / a nV," a“ > / > 7 @ ts 
75€a Tots 7oMots axovew, GAN’ dow TounTiKdTepa, 
TocOUTW ATTOV akovoTéov TaLol Kal avdpdow, OVS — 
Sei edevbe, i Sovreiay Gard aNov — 
et édevbepovs elvar, Sovdciay Pavatov paAdov 
medhoBnuevovs. Lavrdmact pev odv. 
II. Ovxody ere Kal ta mepl tadra dvdpara 
mavra Ta Sewd te Kat doPepa amoPAntéa, KwKU- 
C rods Te Kal otdyas Kal evépous Kai adiBavras, Kat 

@ Said of the death of Patroclus, JI. xvi. 856, and Hector, 
xxii. 382; imitated in the last line of the Aeneid “* Vitaque 
cum gemitu fugit indignata sub umbras,” which is in turn — 
expanded by Masefield in ‘“‘ August 1914.” Cf. Matthew 
Arnold in “ Sohrab and Rustum”: 

Till now all strength was ebb’d and from his limbs 
Unwillingly the spirit fled away, 

Regretting the warm mansion which it left, 

And youth, and bloom, and this delightful world; 

204 4 



Forth from his limbs unwilling his spirit flitted to Hades, 
Wailing its pact and its lustihood lost and the May of its 

and : 
Under the earth like a vapour vanished the gibbering soul,” 


Even as bats in the hollow of some mysterious grotto 

Fly with a flittermouse shriek when one of them falls from 

the cluster 

Whereby they hold to the rock and are clinging the one to 

the other, 

Flitted their gibbering ghosts.” 

We will beg Homer and the other poets not to be 

if we cancel those and all similar passages, 
not that they are not poetic and pleasing? to most 
hearers, but because the more poetic they are the 
less are they suited to the ears of boys and men who 
are destined to be free and to be more afraid of 
slavery than of death.” “ By all means.” 

II. “ Then we must further taboo in these matters 
the entire vocabulary of terror and fear, Cocytus¢ 
named of lamentation loud, abhorred Styx, the flood 
of deadly hate, the people of the infernal pit and of 

Bacchyl. v. 153-4: 
wipatov 6¢ mvéwy Sdxpvoa TAduw 
dyhadv Bay mpodcirwr. 
> Cf. Il. xxiii. 100. 
* Od. xxiy. 6-10. Said of the souls of the suitors slain by 
Odysseus. Cf. Tennyson, ** Oenone”: 
Thin as the bat-like shrillings of the dead. 

4 Cf. Theaetet. 177 c obx aniécrepa dxovew. 
* Milton’s words, which I have borrowed, are the best 
expression of Plato’s thought. 



aAa dca tovtov Tob tUrov dvopalopeva dpizrew 
8) Tout doa ery mavras Tous dxovovras. kai 
lows ed Exe pds ao Te jects dé drep rav 
pvAdKwv PoBovpeba, py ek THs TovavtTns ppikns 
Deppyorepor Kal padakesrepor Tod d€ovTos yévwvrat 
nuiv. Kai dp0ds y’, eon, poPovtpeba.. “Ag- 
aipeTéea apa; Nai. Toy d€ evavtiov tUmov Tovrous 
Aexréov te Kai mountéov; Ada 87. Kai rods 
D dduppods dpa e€arpjoopev Kat Tods olxrous Tovs 
tov é\Noyipwv avdpav; “Avdyxn, 97, ctmep Kal 
Ta TpoTeEpa. Lndzet 5n, Hv 8 ey, et opbds 
eC aupyoopev H ov. dapev Se CUP ore 6 Emueucris 
avip T® emueukel, obmep Kal €raipdos eo7t, TO 
rebvdvat od Sewov nyjoera. Dapev yap. Ovd« 
dpa dbmép y’ exeivov ws Sewov Te memrovOdros 
ddupoir av. Ovd Sita. "AMG pay Kal 708¢ 
Aéyouev, as 6 Towodros pddvora abdros att@ atr- 
Eg dpkns mpos To €0 Civ, Kai SiadepdvTws trav aww 
WKvora. ETEpov Tpoodetrat. "Ady O9, én. “Hewor” 
ap adt@ Sewov orepyOivar vigos 7 adeAdod 7 

1 80a érn is a plausible emendation of Hermann, ref 
Me os recitations of rhapsodists and Peroni te) 
edy. The best mss. read ws olera:, some others ws olév re, 
Per aps the words are best omitted. 

* ppirrew and ¢pixy are often used of the thrill or terror — 
of tragedy. Cf. Soph. Hl. 1402, O.T. 1306, Aeschyl. 
Prom. 540. 

> Some say, to frighten the wicked, but more probably 
for their aesthetic effect. Cf. 3904 ei dé rwa any qdovnv 
maptxensis Laws 886 c ei pév ets GAXo Tt KaA@s 7} mh KadG@s exer. 

© Gepudrepx contains a playful suggestion of the fever 



the charnel-house, and all other terms of this type, 
whose very names send a shudder? through all the 
hearers every year. And they may be excellent for 
other purposes,’ but we are in fear for our guardians 
lest the habit of such thrills make them more sensi- 
tive ° and soft than we would have them.’ “‘ And we 
are right in so fearing.” ‘We must remove those 
things then?” “Yes.” ‘‘ And the opposite type 
to them is what we must require in speech and in 
verse?”’ “ Obviously.’’ “‘ And shall we also do 
away with the wailings and lamentations of men of 
repute?”’ “That necessarily follows,’ he said, 
“from the other.” ‘‘ Consider,” said I, ‘“‘ whether 
we shall be right in thus getting rid of them or not. 
What we affirm is that a good man? will not think 
that for a good man, whose friend he also is, death 
is a terrible thing.”” “Yes, we say that.” “Then 
it would not be for his friend’s* sake as if he had 
suffered something dreadful that he would make 
lament.’”” “‘ Certainly not.” ‘‘ But we also say this, 
that such a one is most of all men sufficient unto 
himself/ for a good life and is distinguished from 
other men in having least need of anybody else.” 
“True,” he replied. “ Least of all then to him is 

following the chill; 6G Phaedr, 251 a. With paraxeérepor 
the image passes into that of softened metal; ¢f. 411 8, Laws 
666 B-c, 671 B. 

4 That only the good can be truly friends was a favourite 
doctrine of the ancient moralists. Cf. Lysis 214 .c, Xen. 
Mem. ii. 6. 9, 20. 

* Cf. Phaedo 117 c “1 wept for myself, for surely not 
for him.” 

? airdpxns is the equivalent of ixavds airg in Lysis 215 a. 
For the idea cf. Menex. 247 8. Self-sufficiency is the mark 
of the good man, of God, of the universe (Tim. 33 p), of 
happiness in Aristotle, and of the Stoic sage. 



7 ” ~ 4, 4 
Xenudrev 7) ddAov Tov Tav Tovovrwv. Hrvora 
pevroe. “Hxvor’ dpa. Kal dduperar, déper’ dé as 
mpadtata, dTav Tis adrov TovavTn Evudopa KaTa- 
AdBn. TloAd ye. "Opbas ap av e&apotuev Tos 
Opyvous Tov ovopacT@y avopOv, yuvarét bé dizro- 
388 didoipev, Kal odd€ TavTats omovdalais, Kal daoL 
Kakol TOV avdpOv, va juiv Svoxepaivwow dp.ova 
Tovtots Trotety os by dapev emt dudakh THs xopas 

/ ¢ / 
Tpepeww. "Opbas, _&oy. IldAw 57) Opsjpou Te 
Senodpueba kal T@v dAAwy ToinTav pu) Tovetv 

’"AyiArda beds maida 
dAAor’ emt mAeupas Katakeipevov, dAAoTE 5” ade 
Umtiov, aAAore Se mpHvy, 
A > > ‘ > , 
tote 8 opov avacravra 
mAwilovr’ advovr’ emi Hiv’ adds arpuyéroto, 
B pide dporepy ae xepolv éXdvta Kovww aidadd- 
egoav Xevdevov KaK keparijs, pnde adda KAai- 
ovrd, Te Kal ddupdpevor, boa Kal ola éxeivos 

emroinaes punde ITpiapov eyyvs Bedv _yeyovera 
AiravevovTd Te Kal KvAwddpevov Kata Kd pov, 

e€ovouakAndnv dvoudlovt’ avdpa ExacTov. 

1 45dperat, péper] this conjecture of Stallbaum reads more 
smoothly: the ss. have ddvpecOar pépew. 

¢ Cf. the anecdotes of Pericles and Xenophon and the 
comment of Pater on Marcus Aurelius in Marius the 
Epicurean. Plato qualifies the Stoic extreme in 6032. The 
Platonic ideal is werpromddera, the Stoic dade, 

> Of. 398 x. 



it a terrible thing to lose son * or brother or his wealth 
or anything of the sort.”. “ Least of all.” “ Then 
he makes the least lament and bears it most 
moderately when any such misfortune overtakes 
him.” “Certainly.” ‘‘ Then we should be right 
in doing away with the lamentations of men of note 
and in attributing them to women,? and not to the 
most worthy of them either, and to inferior men, in 
order that those whom we say we are breeding 
for the guardianship of the land may disdain to act 
like these.” “We should be right,” said he. “ Again 
then we shall request Homer and the other poets not 
to portray Achilles, the son of a goddess, as, 

Lying now on his side, and then again on his back, 
And again on his face,* 

and then rising up and 
Drifting distraught on the shore of the waste unharvested 

nor as clutching with both hands the sooty dust and 
strewing it over his head,* nor as weeping and 
lamenting in the measure and manner attributed to 
him by the poet; nor yet Priam, near kinsman of the 

gods, making supplication and rolling in the dung, 
Calling aloud unto each, by name to each man appealing. 

* The description of Achilles mourning for Patroclus, J/ 
xxiv. 10-12. Cf. Juvenal iii. 279-280: 

Noctem patitur lugentis amicum 
Pelidae, cubat in faciem mox deinde supinus. 

@ Ji. xxiv. 12. Our text of Homer reads dwevteck’ ddtwy 
rapa Biv’ adds, obdé wiv Hobs. Plato’s text may be intentional 
burlesque or it may be corrupt. 

* Il. xviii. 23-24. When he heard of Patroclus’s death. 

f Il. xxii, 414-415. 

VOL. I P 209 





7oNd 8 ert TovTwv paMov Senodpeba prow Beods 
ye mroveiv ddupopevous Kal Aéyovras 

@pot eye dSeAj, wor SvcapiotoToKera* 

> > t 

et 8 ody Beovs, p pATo Tov ye péeyrorov Trav bed 

Tohuijoae ovTws avopmoiws pinoacba, wore’ D 

TOTroL, ae 

7) pidov dvdpa Suwwxdpevov TEpt aoTv 
sb0aotow b op@par, euov 8’ ddopvperat 7rop" 
at al éywr, 6Te por Lapmndova Pidtrarov avdpav 
poip’ do IlatpdxAoto Mevoitiddao Sapjvae. 

iit. Ei yap, & & dire "Adeiuavre, Ta TOLAdTA Hpi 
of véot orovdy akovorev Kal pa Karayeh@ev as 
avatiws Acyouevany, axoAR av éavTov ye Tus av- 
Opwrov ovra dvaEvov Hynoarro ToUrwy Kab ém- 
mAngecev, et Kal emriot abr@ TowodToV 7 Aéyew 7 v) 
Trovety, aN’ ovdev alayuvopevos ovdE Kaprep@v 70A- 
Aovs éxi opexpotar Tabac. Opyvous av abot Kat 
dduppous. "AAnBeorara, eon, déyets. Act dé ive 
ovx, ws aprt piv 6 Adyos eonpuauvev" @ TELOTEOV, 
ews av Tis muds adr KaAXiov. mreton. Od yap 
obv Set. "AMA piv obde didroyélwrds ye Set 

* Thetis in Jl. xviii. 54. > Cf. 3717. 

¢ Jl. xxii. 168. Zeus of Hector. 

4 Jl, xvi. 433-434. Cf. Virgil’s imitation, den. x. 465 ff., 
Cicero, De Div. ii. ch. 10, and the imitation of the whole 
passage in Matthew Arnold’s * Balder Dead.” 

* I have imitated the suggestion of rhythm in the original 
which with its Ionic dative is perhaps a latent quotation 
from tragedy. Cf. Chairemon, ovdeis éwi cptxpotot Avreirat 
copes, N.? fr. 37. 



And yet more than this shall we beg of them at 
least not to describe the gods as lamenting and 

Ah, woe is me, woeful mother who bore to my sorrow the 

and if they will so picture the gods at least not to 
have the effrontery to present so unlikely a likeness? 
of the supreme god as to make him say : 

Out on it, dear to my heart is the man whose pursuit 

around Troy-town 

I must behold with my eyes while my spirit is grieving 

within me,‘ 
and : 
Ah, woe is me! of all men to me is Sarpedon the dearest, 
Fated to fall by the hands of Patroclus, Menoitius’ off- 
r . 

Ill. “ For if, dear Adeimantus, our young men 
should seriously incline to listen to such tales and 
not laugh at them as unworthy utterances, still less 
likely would any man be to think such conduct 
unworthy of himself and to rebuke himself if it 
occurred to him to do or say anything of that kind, 
but without shame or restraint full many a dirge 
for trifles would he chant* and many a lament.” 
“You say most truly,” he replied. ‘‘ But that must 
not be, as our reasoning but now showed us, in 
which we must put our trust until someone convinces 
us with a better reason.”’ ‘“‘ No, it must not be.” 
“ Again, they must not be prone to laughter’ For 

? The ancients generally thought violent laughter un- 
dignified. Cf. Isoc. Demon. 15, Plato, Laws 732 c, 935 8, 
Epictet. Encheirid., xxxiii. 4, Dio Chrys. Or. 33.703 R. Diog. 
Laert. iii. 26, reports that Plato never laughed excessively in 
his youth. Aristotle’s great-souled man would presumably 
have eschewed laughter (Eth. iv. 8, Rhet. 1389 b 10), as Lord 
Chesterfield advises his son to do. 



eivat. oxedov yap Otay tis epufp toxup@ yerAwrt, 
ioyupav Kal 7 Baga he Cnret ro Towobsrov. Aoxket 
pot, epn. Ovre dpa dvOpeimous agious Adyou 

389 Kpatoupevous vb7r0 yéhutos av Tis mov, diro- 

dexréov, 7oAd Sé rTov, av Aeods. IlodAd pevror, 
Ro > @ ” ¢ la 2O\ \ ~ > 
4 8 6s. OdKovv “Opurpov otS€ 7a Tovadra [azo- 
deEdueOa rept Oedv], 

LA 2 #£,3) 0) A / 4 ~ 

aoBeotos 8 ap’ evdpro yéAws paxdpecot Oeoiow, 

i mw” 7 \ 4 , 

Ws tov “Hdatorov da dapara mourviovta, 
ovK dmrodexréov KaTa TOV gov Adyov. Ei ov, &dn, 
B BovAe eov Tub eva od ‘yap obv 57) drodeKréov. 
‘AMa pany Kal dAnevdy ye mepl Tohod Touréov. 
ei yap opbds éréyopev aptt kal TO ovre Deotar pev 
dxpynotov weddos, avOpwmois Sé ypyowmov ws ev 
dapudKov elder, diAov, Stu TO ye ToLobTov taTpots 
dotéov, iduitais dé ody amréov. A7dov, dy. 
Tots dpyovot 81) Tihs moAews elmep Tio aAAois 

ta / nn / i! ~ ov 

pooner pevdeoVar 7 Toei 7 ToATev even 
én apeheta Tis ToAews* Tots de aAAous mow ovx 
dmréov Tob ToLovTov, adAa pds ye 5) Tous TOLOU- 
Tous apxovras town pevoacbas TavTov Kad peilov 
dudprn pia pjoopev 7 Kdpvovre mpos larpov 7) 
dokobvtTt mpos matdoTpiByy mept THv Tod adrod 

* In 563 £ Plato generalizes this psychological principle. 

* This laughter of the Homeric gods has been endlessly 
commented upon. Hegel allegorizes it. Mrs. Browning 
(‘‘ Aurora Leigh”’) says: 

And all true poets laugh unquenchably 
Like Shakespeare and the gods. 

Proclus, In Rempub. i. 127 Kroll, says that it is an expression 
of the abundance of the divine energy. It is acommonplace 
repeated by George Eliot that the primitive sense of humour 



when one abandons himself to violent 
laughter his condition provokes a violent reaction.* ” 
“TI think so,” he said. “‘ Then if anyone represents 
men of worth as overpowered by laughter we must 
not accept it, much less if gods.’ “ Much indeed,” 
he replied. “Then we must not accept from Homer 
such sayings as these either about the gods : 

Quenchless then was the laughter’ that rose from the 

blessed immortals 

When they beheld Hephaestus officiously puffing and 


—we must not accept it on your view.” “If it 
pleases you to call it mine,” he said; “‘ at any rate 
we must not accept it.” “ But further we must 
surely prize truth most highly. For if we were right 
in what we were just saying and falsehood is in 
very deed useless to gods, but to men useful as a 
remedy or form of medicine, it is obvious that such 
a thing must be assigned to physicians, and laymen 
should have nothing to do with it.” ‘“‘ Obviously,” 
he replied. “The rulers then of the city may, if 
anybody, fitly lie on account of enemies or citizens 
for the benefit* of the state; no others may have 
anything to do with it, but for a layman to lie to 
rulers of that kind we shall affirm to be as great a 
sin, nay a greater, than it is for a patient not to tell 
his physician or an athlete his trainer the truth 
of the Homeric gods laughs at the personal vay of 
Hephaestus, but they really laugh at his officiousness and the 
contrast he presents to Hebe. Cf. my note in Class. Phil. 
xxii. (1927) pp. 222-223. 

© Cf. on 334 v. 4 Cf. 382 pv. 

* Cf. 3348, 459 p. A cynic might compare Cleon’s plea 
in Aristoph. Knights 1226 éya & éxXexrov éx’ ayabS ye 7H 
woke. Cf. Xen. Mem. ii. 6. 37, Bolingbroke, Letters to 
Pope, p. 172. 



oWpaTos maOnpdrov pa) Tadn Oh Aéyeuw, 7 a7pos 
KuBepyijryy mepl Tijs vews Te Kat Tey vavTav Ta) 
Ta ovta A€yovtt, OTws 7 adros 4 Tis TOV Evv- 
vavT@v mpagews exe. ‘Ady beorara, én). “Av 
Dg, dp’ dMNov Twa. AapBavy pevddpevov ev TH mdAet 

Tov ot Sypuwovpyol act, 
pavrw 7) inthpa Kakdv } téxTova Sovpwyr, 

Koddget ws emuTTOEvpLa. eladyovra moAews waomTrep 
veds dvarpemruKov Te Kat oA€Opiov. “Edy ye, 7 
5° os, emi ye Ady € epya TeAjrae. Té 5€; awdpo- 
avvns dpa ov dence jv Tots veaviats ; lds 8° 
ov; Lodpoovyns be obs nbc ov 7a Toudde 
Heéylora, dpxovrev pev dankdous elvat, avrovs be 

E dpxovras Tay mept métous Kal adpodtova Kai rept 
edwdas Adovdv; “Epouye Soxet. Ta 57) TOUdoE 
djcopev, olua, Kadds A€éyecOar, ofa Kal “Oprpw 
Avopndns réye, 

a ~ oj) 2 / 4 
TérTa, aww7h hoo, éu@d 8 émumeifeo pi0w, 
\ i Pay 
Kal Ta TOUTWY exopeva, TA 

” tA , > 
[tcav pévea mveiovtes ’Axatot] 
ovyh Sedidtes onuavropas, 

390 kat dca dAAa Towatra. Kadds. Ti d€; 7a towdde 

* Od. xvii. 383-384. Jebb, Homer, p. 69. 

® The word is chosen to fit both ship and state. Cf. 
424, 442 B; and Alcaeus apud Aristoph. Wasps 1235, Eurip. 
Phoen. 888, "Aeschines iii. 158, Epictet. iii. 7. 20. 

* That is, probably, if our Utopia is realized. Cf. 4524 
ei mpdterat @ déyerat. Cf. the imitation in Epistles 357 a 
elrrep épya ent v@ éylyvero. 

4 For the mass of men, as distinguished from the higher 



about his bodily condition, or for a man to deceive 
the pilot about the ship and the sailors as to the 
real condition of himself or a fellow-sailor, and how 
they fare.” “‘ Most true,” he replied. “If then 
the ruler catches anybody else in the city lying, any 
of the craftsmen 

Whether a prophet or healer of sickness or joiner of 


he will chastise him for introducing a practice as 
subversive ’and destructive of astate as it is of a ship.” 
“ He will,” he said, “if deed follows upon word.°”’ 
“ Again, will our lads not need the virtue of self- 
control?”’ “Ofcourse.” “‘ And for the multitude? 
are not the main points of self-control these—to be 
obedient to their rulers and themselves to be rulers ° 
over the bodily appetites and pleasures of food, 
drink, and the rest?” “I think so.” “ Then, I 
take it, we will think well said such sayings as that 
of Homer’s Diomede : 

Friend, sit down and be silent and hark to the word of my 
and what follows : 
Breathing high spirit the Greeks marched silently fearing 
their captains,’ 
and all similar passages.” “ Yes, well said.” “* But 
what of this sort of thing ? 

philosophical virtue. Often misunderstood. For the mean- 
I of cwdpoctivn ef. my review of Jowett’s Plato, A.J.P. 
vol. xiii. (1892) p. 361. Cf. Unity of Plato’s Thought, 
p- 15 and n. 77. 

* In Gorg. 491 v-£, Callicles does not understand what 
Socrates means by a similar expression. 

? Il. iv. 412. Diomede to Sthenelos. 

2 In our Homer this is JI. iii. 8, and ony «rh. iv. 431. 
See Howes in Harvard Studies, vi. pp. 153-237. 


oivoBapés, Kuvos Oupat’ Exwv, Kpadiny 8’ eAddoro 

Kal Ta ToUTwY €&fs dpa Kad@s, Kal doa aAAa tis 
év Aoyw 7) €v Tounoe: eipnKke veavedpaTa ldiwTa@v 
> + > ~ > / 4 
eis apyovras; Od Kadds. Od ydp, olwat, eis ye 
awhpoatynv veows emiTideva akovew* ef Sé TiVO 
* c \ / A > / a“ ~ 
aAAnv ndovnv mapéxerat, Oavpacrov oddév: } THs 
cor patverat; Ovrtws, edn. 

IV. Ti 8€; zovety dvdpa tov coduitarov Aé- 
yovra, ws Soke? adt@ Kadddvorov elvar mavTwr, 
6tav maparmActar Wo tpamelau 

/ ‘ ~ / - Loe -~ > , 
B_ airov Kai Kpedv, webu 8 ex Kpnripos adicowv 
oivoxdos dopénot Kat eyyein Semdecot, 

cal > /, ‘ > / c A 
Soke? cou emiTydevov elvar mpos eyKpaTeay EavTod 
a” \ 
axovew vew; 7 TO 
a > mu / ‘ /, > tal 
Awd 8 oixriotov Oavéew Kat motpov éemometv; 

H Alia, Kabevddvtwy t&v ddrAwy Oedv Te Kal 
avOpwimwv Kal povos eypyyopws a éBovAevoaTo, 
C tovTwr mdavrwy padiws émiAavOavdpevov Sia THY 
T&v adpodioiwy éemiOvpiav, Kai ovtws exmAayévra 
iddvta tv “Hpav, wore pnd’ eis TO Swpudriov 
edédew €Adciv, add’ adrot BovAdpevov yapat Evy- 
yiyvecbar, Kai Aéyovra ws odtws tro éemBupias 
exeTat, Ws ovd dte TO mp@tov édoitwy pods 


@ Tl, i. 225. Achilles to the commander-in-chief. Aga- 
memnon. Several lines of insult follow. 

> Cf. Philebus 42 c. ¢ Of. Gorgias 482 c. 

4 Odysseus in Od. ix. 8-10. For wapamdeta the Homeric 
text has rapa 6é rA7j0wot, Plato’s treatment of the quotation 

216 | 


Heavy with wine with the eyes of a dog and the heart of 
a fleet deer,* 

and the lines that follow,® are these well—and other 
impertinences° in prose or verse of private citizens 
to their rulers?” ‘“‘ They are not well.” “ They 
certainly are not suitable for youth to hear for the 
inculeation of self-control. But if from another 
point of view they yield some pleasure we must not 
be surprised; or what is your view of it?”’ ‘ This,” 
he said. 
__ IV. “ Again, to represent the wisest man as saying 
that this seems to him the fairest thing in the world, 

When the bounteous tables are standing 
Laden with bread and with meat and the cupbearer ladles 
the sweet wine 
Out of the mixer and bears it and empties it into the 

—do you think the hearing of that sort of thing will 
conduce to a young man’s temperance or self-control ? 
or this : 

Hunger is the most piteous death that a mortal may suffer.® 

Or to hear how Zeus lightly forgot all the designs 
which he devised, awake while the other gods and 
men slept, because of the excitement of his passions, 
and was so overcome by the sight of Hera that he 
is not even willing to go to their chamber, but wants 
to lie with her there on the ground and says that 
he is possessed by a fiercer desire than when they 
first consorted with one another, 

is hardly fair to Homer. Aristotle, Pol. 1338 a 28, cites it 
more fairly to illustrate the use of music for entertainment 
(d:aywyy). The passage, however, was liable to abuse. See 
the use made of it by Lucian, Parasite 10. 

* Od. xii. 342, 7 Il. xiv. 294-341. 



didrovs Ajnfovte ToKas; 

ovde “Apeds te kat “Adpoditrns tro ‘Hdaiorov 
deapov du” Erepa Toradra. Od pa tov Aia, 7 8° ds, 
D ov pot daiverar éemitypdevcov. “AAV el ov tues, 
jv & ey, Kaptepiar mpos dmavta Kat A€yovrat 
Kal mpatrovrat bo eAAoyiiwv avdpav, Jearéov re 
kal aKovoTéov, olov Kal TO 
otHOos 5é mAnEas Kpadinv jvirame pve: 
rérhabe 81, kpadin: Kat Kdvtepov dAdo 707’ ErAys. 

Ilavrazact pev odv, edn. Od pev 81) SwpoddKovs 
ye eatéov clvar tods avdpas odde diAoxpnpdtous. 
E Ovdapds. O88’ dordov adrots dre 
Sapa Beods meifer, 5p’ aidoiovs BaoAjas: 

ovde tov tod “AywdAéws traidaywydv Doinka 
érraweréov, ws petpiws eAeye ovpBovdedwv abtd 
Sdpa pev AaBdvre erapdvew Tots ’Axaois, dvev de 
Sadpwv un amadAdrrecbar THs pyvios. 00d’ adrov 
‘ > / > / 29> c , 4 
tov "AywAdrda aéviaopev 08d’ dpodroynaopev obtw 
diroypnuatov elvar, wore Tapa Tod “Ayapeuvovos 
S@pa AaBeiv, kat tywjv ad AaBdvta vexpobd azro- 
391 Avew, dAAws Sé pr OérAew. OdvxKovy dixadv ye, 
édyn, erauwely ta Tovadra. “Oxvd S€é ye, hv 8 
eyo, dV “Opnpov Aéyew, dtu 038° Govov tabrd ye 
\ > / 4 \ »” / ta 
kata “AyiAAdws ddvar Kat adAwy Aeyovtwy Tei- 
Oeabar, Kat ad os mpos Tov ’AmdAAw elzev 

@ Od. viii. 266 ff. 

’ May include on Platonic principles the temptations of 
pleasure. Cf. Laws 633 v, Laches 191 D-£. 

© Od. xx. 17-18. Quoted also in Phaedo 94 p-x. 

4 Suidas s.v. dpa says that some attributed the line to 



Deceiving their dear parents. 
Nor will it profit them to hear of Hephaestus’s fettering 
of Ares and Aphrodite? for a like motive.” “No, 
by Zeus,” he said, “I don’t think it will.” “ But 
any words or deeds of endurance in the face of all 
odds ® attributed to famous men are suitable for our 
youth to see represented and to hear, such as: 

He smote his breast and chided thus his heart, 
* Endure, my heart, for worse hast thou endured.’ *” 

“ By all means,” he said. “It is certain that we 
cannot allow our men to be acceptors of bribes or 
greedy for gain.” ‘By no means.” “Then they 
must not chant : 

Gifts move the gods and gifts persuade dread kings.* 
Nor should we approve Achilles’ attendant Phoenix ¢ 
as speaking fairly when he counselled him if he 
received gifts for it to defend the Achaeans, but 
without gifts not to lay aside his wrath ; nor shall we 
think it proper nor admit that Achilles 't himself was 
so greedy as to accept gifts from Agamemnon and 
again to give up a dead body after receiving 
payment’ but otherwise to refuse.” “It is not 
right,” he said, “to commend such conduct.” “But, 
for Homer's sake,” said I, “‘ I hesitate to say that it is 
positively impious” to affirm such things of Achilles 
and to believe them when told by others; or again 
to believe that he said to Apollo 

Hesiod. Cf. Eurip. ——t 964, Ovid, Ars Am. iii. 653, 
Otto, Sprichw. d. Rém. 2 

* See his speech, JI. ix. B15 f. 

? Cf. Il. xix. 278 ff. But Achilles in Homer is indifferent 
to the gifts. 

9 Il. xxiv. 502, 555, 594. But in 560 he does not explicitly 
mention the ransom. *® Cf. 368 B. 

219 - 


éBraas pw éxdepye, Oedv dAodtare mdvTwv: 
ho av ticaipny, el por Svvapis ye mapein: 

B Kal Ws mpos Tov TOTA[LOV, Beov 6 ovra, dares cixe 
Kal paxeoOar & ETOULOS yy Kal ad tds Tod érépov 
ToTapod Lepxevod icpas tpixas 

TlarpéxAw ypwi, dn, Kounv dmdoayu dépecbar, 

veKp@ ovrt, Kal ws edpace Touro, ov TELOTEOV. 
Tas TE av ‘Exropos erfeis rept TO ona TO Ta- 
TpoKov Kal Tas TOV Saypnbevrev odayas «is Thy 
mupay, vumavra TadtTa od djooper adn OA <ipi- 
C ofa, odd’ édoopev meiBeoBar Tovs %EeTepous ws 
“AxMeds, Deas & av mais Kal IInAéws, owdpoveora- 
Tov Te Kal Tpitov azo Avs, Kal 070 TO copurdry 
Xetpwve TeOpappevos, TooauTys ay Tapaxys mréws, 
dar’ exew ev abr voonpate dvo é evavriw addr ow, 
dverevbepiavy pera prroxpnuatias Kal ad v7ep- 
noaviav Oedv te kat avOpimwv ’Opbds, &dn, 

Fi ahs 
V. My toivuv, qv 8 eyd, unde rdde rrevOadpucba 
pnd edpev Aéyew, ws Onoeds Tloceddvos vids 
D Ilewpifovs re Atos wpunoev ottws emi Sewas 
dprayds, unde tw’ adAov Oeod maida te Kal jpw 

2 Jl, xxii. 15. Professor Wilamowitz uses é\owrare to 
prove that Apollo was a god of destruction. But Menelaus 
says the same of Zeus in JI. iii. 365. Cf. Class. Phil. vol. iv. 
(1909) p. 329. 

» Scamander. (JI. xxi. 130-132. 

¢ Jl. xxiii. 151. Cf. Proclus, p. 146 Kroll. Plato ex- 
aggerates to make his case. The locks were vowed to 
Spercheius on the condition of Achilles’ return. In their 
context the words are innocent enough, 

@ Jl. xxiv. 14 ff. @ Jl, xxiii, 175-176. 

- 220 



Me thou hast baulked, Far-darter, the most pernicious of 

all gods, 
Mightily would I requite thee if only my hands had the 
And how he was disobedient to the river,? who was 
a god, and was ready to fight with him, and again 
that he said of the locks of his hair, consecrated to 
the other river Spercheius : 

This let me give to take with him my hair to the hero, 

who was a dead body, and that he did so we must 
not believe. And again the trailings? of Hector’s 
body round the grave of Patroclus and the slaughter ¢ 
of the living captives upon his pyre, all these we 
will affirm to be lies, nor will we suffer our youth to 
believe that Achilles, the son of a goddess and of 
Peleus the most chaste’ of men, grandson? of Zeus, 
and himself bred under the care of the most sage 
Cheiron, was of so perturbed a spirit as to be affected 
with two contradictory maladies, the greed that 
becomes no free man and at the same time over- 
weening arrogance towards gods and men.” “ You 
are right,” he said. 

V. “ Neither, then,” said I, “‘ must we believe this 
or suffer it to be said, that Theseus, the son of 
Poseidon, and Peirithoiis, the son of Zeus, attempted 
such dreadful rapes,” nor that any other child of a 

? Proverbially. Cf. Pind. Nem. iv. 56, v. 26, Aristoph. 
Clouds 1063, and my note on Horace iii. 7. 17. 

2 Zeus, Aeacus, Peleus. For the education of Achilles by 
Cheiron cf. Jl. xi. 832, Pindar, Nem. iii., Eurip. IA. 926-927, 
Plato, Hipp. Minor 371 v. 

* Theseus was assisted by Peirithoiis in the rape of Helen 
and joined Peirithoiis in the attempt to abduct Persephone. 

Theseus was the theme of epics and of lost plays by 
Sophocles and Euripides. 



toAufoa av Sewa Kal aoeBH epydoacbat, ofa viv 
Kataxevdovra. ad’t@v: adda mpocavaykalwpev 
Tovs TounTas 7) p17) TovTwy adra epya davar 7 
tovtous pi) elvar Oedv raidas, dapddrepa Sé 42) 
Aéyew, nde juiv emyerpetv meiVew tods veous, 
ws of Jeot Kaka yevv@or, Kal Hpwes avOpammwv 
E oddev BeAtiovs. Smep yap év tots mpdabev édeé- 
yopuev, 00” doa Tatra ovr’ aAnOA: éemedeiéapev 
ydp mov, oT ék Dedv Kaka ylyveoar advvatov. 
Il@s yap o¥; Kai piv rots ye axovovor BrAaBepa- 
mas yap €avt@ Evyyvadpnv eEer KaKk@ Ovtr, mret- 
abeis cbs dpa Tovatra mpatroval Te Kal EmpaTtTov Kal 
ot Ocdv ayxiomopot 
Znvos éyyts, dv xat’ “ldatov mdyov 
Aws matpdov Bwuds éor’ ev aidépu, 
Kal ov mw odw eEirndrov alps Saydovwr. 

Ov évexa mavatéov tovs TovovTous pvOous, pun Hysiv 
392 moAAjv edyéperav evtiktwot Tots véous movynptas. 
Kowidp péev odv, edn. Ti odv, fv 8 eyw, ett 
Aowrdv eldos Adywv mépu dpilopevois olovs TE 
Aexréov Kal ph; epi yap Oedv ds Set A€yeoBar 
elipytat, Kai mrept Saydvwv Te Kal Hpwwv Kal TOV 
ev "Aidov; Idvu pév ody. Odxodv kai wept avOpa- 
mwv To Aowrov ein av; Andra 84. "Addvarov 
57, @ dire, juiv roird ye ev TH mapovte Taka. 
Ids; “Ore olwar jpas épetv, bs dpa Kat troumral 
Bai Aoyoowwl Kakds Aéyovar wept avOpwmwv Ta 

¢ Plato was probably thinking of this passage when he 
wrote the last paragraph of the Critias. 

> From Aeschylus’s Niobe. 

¢ Cf. my note in Class. Phil. vol. xii. (1910) p. 308. 



and hero would have brought himself to accom- 
plish the terrible and impious deeds that they now 
falsely relate of him. But we must constrain the 
poets either to deny that these are their deeds or 
that they are the children of gods, but not to make 
both statements or attempt to persuade our youth 
that the gods are the begetters of evil, and that 
heroes are no better than men. For, as we were 
saying, such utterances are both impious and false. 
For we proved, I take it, that for evil to arise from 
gods is animpossibility.” “‘ Certainly.” “ And they 
are furthermore harmful to those that hear them. 
For every man will be very lenient with his own 
misdeeds if he is convinced that such are and were 
the actions of 
The near-sown seed of gods, 
Close kin to Zeus, for whom on Ida’s top 

Ancestral altars flame to highest heaven, 
Nor in their life-blood fails * the fire divine.® 

For which cause we must put down such fables, lest 
they breed in our youth great laxity ¢ in turpitude.” 
“Mostassuredly.” ‘‘ What type of discourse remains 
for our definition of our prescriptions and proscrip- 
tions? We have declared the right way of speaking 
about gods and daemons and heroes and that other 
world?” “We have.” “Speech, then, about men would 
betheremainder.” “ Obviously.” “* It is impossible 
for us, my friend, to place this here.?” ‘‘ Why?” 
“ Because I presume we are going to say that so it 
is that both poets and writers of prose speak wrongly 
about men in matters of greatest moment, saying 

* Or possibly “‘ determine this at present.’? The prohibi- 

tion which it would beg the question to place here is made 
explicit in Laws 660 £. Cf. Laws 899 p, and supra 364 B. 



péytora, ote eiolv dSuKov pev, evdaipoves de ToMoi, 
dixator dé GOA, Kal ws AvowreAct TO dduceiv, éav 
AavOdvyn, 4 Sé Sixavoodvn adAdTpiov pev ayabor, 
oikeia be ‘Cnnlae Kal 7a. fev Tovadra azepeiy dé- 
yew, Ta 8 evavria TOUT mpoordgew adew TE 
Kal pvbodroyetv: Uy) otk ole; Ed pev odv, edn, 
ola. Odxodv éav oporoyiis opbas pe Nepean, 
al aw ce apodoynkévae a mada Cyrodper; 
C “‘Opbas, eby, bréAaBes. Odxotv mrepi dvO pesmey 
OTL ToLovTOUS Set Adyous Aéyeoar, Tote Su- 
onoroynoducba, Grav etpwuev, olov eote SiKato- 
ovvn, Kal ws pvoer AvoiteAoby 7TH Exovtr, edv TE 
ose § edv Te a) TOLovTOS elvan; "Adnbéorara, ey. 

VI. Ta pev cy Adyeov Tépt exeTw Tédos, 70 de 
Actews, ws eyGpar, [ETA TOUTO OKETTEOV, Kal HIV 
a te Aextéov Kal ws Aexréov TavTEeADs eaxeeTar. 
kat 6 *Adeiuarros, Tobro, 47 6s, ov pavOaven 6 
Dv i Neves. "AAAa pevrot, 1, 8 eye, det ye. lows 
obty THde paAov clcet. Gp’ ov mdvTa, doa brr6 
pvlorAcywr 7 TounTav A€yerat, Sunynots obca 
Tuyxdver ] yeyoverwv 7 ty ovrwy 7)  peAd\ovtwv; Ti 
yap, én, dAdo; *Ap’ obv odxt Aro adn Sinynoe 7H 7 
dua ppnoews yeyvopevy 7 bu’ dpdotépwy mrepat- 
vovow; Kai Todo, 4 Oo és, ert Seopa cadéorepov 
pabetv. Tedotos, Fv 8 eyw, €ouxa SdiddoKados 

* \éywv here practically means the matter, and A¢fews, 
which became a technical term for diction, the manner, as 
Socrates explains when Adeimantus fails to ‘understand. 

> Cf. Aristot. Poet. 1449 b 27. 

¢ All art is essentially imitation for Plato and Aristotle. 
But imitation means for them not only the portrayal or 
description of visible and tangible things, but more especially 
the communication of a mood or feeling, hence the (to a 
modern) paradox that music is the most imitative of the arts. 



+. - ~~ 


that there are many examples of men who, though 
unjust, are happy, and of just men who are wretched, 
and that there is profit in injustice if it be concealed, 
and that justice is the other man’s good and your 
own loss ; and I presume that we shall forbid them to 
say this sort of thing and command them to sing and 
fable the opposite. Don’t you think so?” “Nay, 
I well know it,” he said. “ Then, if you admit that 
I am right, I will say that you have conceded the 
original point of our inquiry?” “ Rightly appre- 
hended,” he said. “Then, as regards men that 
speech must be of this kind, that is a point that 
we will agree upon when we have discovered the 
nature of justice and the proof that it is profitable 
to its possessor whether he does or does not appear 
to be just.” ““ Most true,” he replied. 

VI. “So this concludes the topic of tales. That 
of diction, I take it, is to be considered next. So we 
shall have completely examined both the matter 
and the manner of speech.’” And Adeimantus said, 
“I don’t understand what you mean by this,” 
“Well,” said I, “we must have you understand. 
Perhaps you will be more likely to apprehend it 
thus. Is not everything that is said by fabulists or 
poets a narration of past, present, or future things ? ” 
“What else could it be?” he said. “ Do not they 
proceed ° either by pure narration or by a narrative 
that is effected through imitation,‘ or by both?” 
“This too,’ he said, “I still need to have made 
plainer.” ‘‘I seem to be a ridiculous and obscure 
But Plato here complicates the matter further by sometimes 
using imitation in the narrower sense of dramatic dialogue 
as opposed to narration. An attentive reader will easily 

observe these distinctions. Aristotle’s Poetics makes much 
use of the ideas and the terminology of the following pages. 

VOL. I Q 225 


elva Kal doadis. worep odv of advvarou Aéyew, 
E od Kara dhov aan’ dmohaBew [épos Tt meypdcopial 
got ev TOUTW dyA@oa 6 ) Bowropar. kat pot etre: 
émioraca Tijs "IAuddos Ta mpra, ev ofs 6 mownths 
dnou Tov pev Xpvonv detofae Too “Ayapepuvovos 
amroAtoat THY Ouyarépa, Tov 6€ xareraivew, TOV 
393 dé, émresd7) ovK ervyxave, Karevxeoban + TOV “Axardv 
mpos TOV Beov; ; “Eywye. Olc6’ ody dri péxpt pev 
ToUTWwY TOV émav 
Kal éXicoeto mavtas *Ayatovs, 
’Atpeida S€ pddtora Sdw, Kooprrope Aadv 
A€yer te adtos 6 TonTHs Kal ovd’ emuyerpel Hud 
THv Sudvovav GdAove TpETEWw, Ws aAXos Tis 6 Aeywr 
B% adrds: 7a 5é pera Tatra womep adtos wv O 
Xpvons Adyer Kai weuparar yds 6 Tt padora 
moujoar pa) “Opmpov Soxeiv elvae Tov _A€yovra 
aAXra tov iepéa, mpeoBirny o evra Kal THY any 
57) méoav oxeddv Tt tre meTrolnrau Sujynow mepi 
te TOV ev “IKiw Kal mepi TOV év ‘T6dxn Kat An 
’Odvoceia mabnpdrov. Tdvy pev ovv, edn. Ov«- 
ody Sujynots pév éort Kal dray Tas pices éxd- 
atote Aéyn Kai drav 7a perago TOV Pryce ; 
Ids yap ov; AM orav ye Twa. Aeyn prow 
Cas tis dMos av, ap od Tore Spovody adrov 
djoopev 6 TL padAoTa TH abtod Ad~w ExdoTw, 

* Socratic urbanity professes that the speaker, not the 
hearer, is at fault. Cf. Protag. 340 ©, Phileb. 23 v. 

> Plato and Aristotle often contrast the universal and the 
particular as whole and part. Cf. Unity of Piato’s Thought, 

52. Though a good style is concrete, it is a mark of 
Toei helplessness not to be able to state an idea in 



teacher,*’”’ I said; ‘‘so like men who are unable to 
express themselves I won’t try to speak in wholes? 
and universals but will separate off a particular part 
and by the example of that try to show you my 
meaning. Tell me. Do you know the first lines 
of the Iliad in which the poet says that Chryses 
implored Agamemnon to release his daughter, and 
that the king was angry and that Chryses, failing of 
his request, imprecated curses on the Achaeans in 
his prayers to the god?” “Ido.” “ You know 
then that as far as these verses, 
And prayed unto all the Achaeans, 
Chiefly to Atreus’ sons, twin leaders who marshalled the 

the poet himself is the speaker and does not even 
attempt to suggest to us that anyone but himself 
is speaking. But what follows he delivers as if he 
were himself Chryses and tries as far as may be to 
make us feel that not Homer is the speaker, but the 
priest, anoldman. And in this manner he has carried 
on nearly all the rest of his narration about affairs 
in Ilion, all that happened in Ithaca, and the entire 
Odyssey.” ‘‘ Quite so,” he said. “ Now, it is 
narration, is it not, both when he presents the 
several speeches and the matter between the 
speeches?” ‘“‘ Of course.” ‘‘ But when he delivers 
a speech as if he were someone else, shall we not 
say that he then assimilates thereby his own diction 
as far as possible to that of the person whom he 
generalterms. Cf. Locke, Human Understanding, iii. 10.27: 
“*This man is hindered in his discourse for want of words to 
communicate his complex ideas, which he is therefore forced 
to make known by an enumeration of the simple ones that 

com them.” 
¢ fl. i. 15 f. 



év av mpoetmy ws epobyra; Dijooper- ri yap; 
Odxoby TO ye djovody é éavrov aM 7 7 Kara perv 
7) Kata oxhpa pyretobat éoTw exeivov @ av TUS 
opovot ; Td pay "Ev 8) 7O Towurw, as eouKev, 
obTés TE Kal ot aAXoL mounrat dud _bepajoews THY 
dupynow Trovobvrae. Have fev ovv. fe dé ye 
pndapob €avrov dmoxpumrouro 6 MOUTHS, Taco. 
av atvT@ dvev pyLTpoEcos 7 motnats TE Kal Supynars 
D yeyovvia ety. iva dé yy elms, ort ovK av pavOd- 
vel, Orrws: dy Tobro yevouro, eyo ppdcw. el yap 
“Opnpos elmwv, Ore 7Adev 6 6 Xpvons Ths Te Ouvya- 
TpOS Adrpa dépwv Kat ixérns Trav “Axady, pddora 
d€ TOv Bacirewr, pera Tobro pe) ws Xpvons yevo- 
jevos édeyev, GAN’ ere ws “Opnpos, otc? dru ovK 
av pina nv add’ dadf Supynars. elxe oi a 
wade mas: ppdow dé dvev _HeTpov" ob yap ett 
E rrounrikds: €Oayv 6 tepeds NUXETO éxelvous fev Tovs 
Beods dobvat eAovras thv Tpoiav avrovs owbivat, 
TH dé Ovyarépa of boat defapevous dzrowa kat 
tov Oedv aidecobevtas. taira dé eimdvtos adTob of 
fev aAXou é€o€Bovto Kal auvyvour, 6 Se “Ayapeuvev 
Hyplawev evteAAdpevos viv Te amvévar Kal adbis p17) 
eAOeiv, 7) adt@ TO Te OKAMTpOV Kal Ta TOD Beod 
oTepaTa ovK emapKécow mpl dé AvOAvat adTod 
\ / > mw ” / A 

TH Ovyarépa., ev Apyet Eby ynpdcew pera ov: 
amvevan o exéAeve Kal 17) epebilew, t iva o@s oixade 
394 MM. 6 5é mpeaBUTns akovcas edevcé TE Kal 

@ In the narrower sense. 

» Of. Hazlitt, Antony and Cleopatra: ‘* Shakespeare does 
not stand reasoning on what his characters would do or say, 
but at once becomes them and speaks and acts for them.” 

¢ From here to 394 B, Plato gives a prose paraphrase of 



announces as about to speak?” “ We shall ob- 

viously.’’ “‘ And is not likening one’s self to another 
in speech or bodily bearing an imitation of him 
to whom one likens one’s self?” “Surely.” “In 

such case then, it appears, he and the other poets 
effect their narration through imitation.” “Certainly.” 
“ But if the poet should conceal himself nowhere, 
then his entire poetizing and narration would have 
been accomplished without imitation.* And _ lest 
you may say again that you don’t understand, I will 
explain to you how this would be done. If Homer, 
after telling us that Chryses came with the ransom 
of his daughter and as a suppliant of the Achaeans 
but chiefly of the kings, had gone on speaking not 
as if made or being Chryses ® but still as Homer, you 
are aware that it would not be imitation but narration, 
pure and simple. It would have been somewhat in 
this wise. I will state it without metre for I am not 
a poet :° the priest came and prayed that to them 
the gods should grant to take Troy and come safely 
home, but that they should accept the ransom and 
release his daughter, out of reverence for the god; and 
when he had thus spoken the others were of reverent 
mind and approved, but Agamemnon was angry and 
bade him depart and not come again lest the sceptre 
and the fillets of the god should not avail him. And 
ere his daughter should be released, he said, she 
would grow old in Argos with himself, and he ordered 
him to be off and not vex him if he wished to 
get home safe. And the old man on hearing this 
was frightened and departed in silence, and having 

Il. i. 12-42. Roger Ascham in his Schoolmaster quotes it as 
a perfect example of the best form of exercise for learning 
a language. 



ame ovyh, amoywpnoas S€ éx tod otparomédov 
moa TH "Ardd\Awru yiyeto, Tas Te emwvupias 
706 Beod avaxaddv Kai dromywioKwv Kal arraiTav, 
Ovoiats Kexapiopevov Swprjoaito: dv 8) xdpw 
KaTyvxeto Ticat Tods "Ayatods Ta & SdKpva Tots 
sts , ” > o> + @ elke 
exeivou BéAcow. ovtTws, Hv 8 eyo, @ Erailpe, 
avev puyunoews andq Sinynats yiyverar. Mavdave, 
dvOave Towvuy v é wo, OTe TavTyNS a 
VII. Mavé » vs : b 
evavtia yiyverat, OTav Tis Ta TOO ToLnTOD Ta 
petald TaV piocwy eEarpav Ta dpuorBata KataAeimn. 
Kai todro, é¢n, pavOdvw, dtu eat TO mepl Tas 
/ ~ > / mv e / 
Tpaywodias Tootrov. *Opbdrara, env, tréAafes, 
‘ > / ” aA a > / > 
Kat olwat cou 75y SyAoby 6 Eumpoober ody olds T 
qv, OTL THS mounceds Te Kal pvbodoyias 7 pev Sia 
pipncews OAn eoTiv, domep ad A€yeis, Tpaywdia 
Te Kal Kwuwodia, 4 dé du” dmayyeAias adrod Tot 
TownTod" et pots 8 dav adrhy pddvora jou ev 
dGupapBors- 9 8 ad bv dpuporépw €i ev TE TH TOV 
eTa@v Tounoet, moAdaxod dé Kal EMobt, el Loe 
pavOdvers. "Ada Evvinus, épn, 6 tote €Bovdov 
Aéyeww. Kai ro apo rovrov 57 avayvicbnr., ort 
” “a A / o, > A e A 
édayev, a pev Aextéov, Hon etpjabat, ws dé 
Aexréov, ere oKemTEOv elvan. “AMa pepynpa. 
D Toéro toivuy avro Hv é éXeyov, ort xpetn du- 
oporoyjoacbar, mOT€pov edoopev Tovs mounTas [e- 
poupevous jpiv Tas Sunyyjoets mrovetoban, 7 Ta 
pev puyovpevous, Ta SE x}, Kal Omrota ExdTEpa, 7 

* The dithyramb was technically a poem in honour of 
Bacchus. For its more or less conjectural history ef. 
Pickard-Cambridge, Dithyramb, Tragedy and Comedy. 




gone apart from the camp he prayed at length to 
Apollo, invoking the appellations of the god, and 
reminding him of and asking requital for any of his 
gifts that had found favour whether in the building 
of temples or the sacrifice of victims. In return for 
these things he prayed that the Achaeans should 
suffer for his tears by the god’s shafts. It is in this 
way, my dear fellow,” I said, “ that without imitation 
simple narration results.” “I understand,” he said. 

VII. “‘ Understand then,” said I, “that the opposite 
of this arises when one removes the words of the poet 
between and leaves the alternation of speeches.” 
“This too I understand,” he said, ““—it is what 
happens in tragedy.” ‘“‘ You have conceived me 
most rightly,” I said, “‘ and now I think I can make 
plain to you what I was unable to before, that there 
is one kind of poetry and tale-telling which works 
wholly through imitation, as you remarked, tragedy 
and comedy ; and another which employs the recital 
of the poet himself, best exemplified, 1 presume, in 
the dithyramb*; and there is again that which 
employs both, in epic poetry and in many other places, 
if you apprehend me.” “I understand now,” he 
said,“ what you then meant.” “ Recall then also the 
preceding statement that we were done with the 
“ what ’ of speech and still had to consider the“ how.’ ”’ 
“Tremember.” ‘‘ What I meant then was just this, 
that we must reach a decision whether we are to 
suffer our poets to narrate as imitators or in part as 
imitators and in part not, and what sort of things in 

Here, however, it is used broadly to designate the type of 
elaborate Greek lyric which like the odes of Pindar and 
Bacchylides narrates a myth or legend with little if any 



ovde pupetobar. Mavrevoua, &dn, oKorreioat oe, 
tre TmapadeEouela Tpay@diav Te Kal kopmdtav eis 
TI Tow, cire Kat ov. “lows, Hv 8 eye tows dé 
Kal Aciw € er Toure od yap 57) € eywye TH olda, 
adn’ brn av o Adyos dorep mvedp.a pépy, Tavrn 
E iréov. Kai Kadds y’, edn, Aéyets. Tod¢ _Toivuy, 
oy ‘Adcivavte, abpet, mOTEpov pynrucods Ty de? 
civar Tovs pihaxas 7 ov; oy) Kal tobro Tots 
eumpooley €merat, OTt els EKaoTos €v pev av 
emuTTOevpLa. Kad@s emitndevor, toAAa 8° ov, adn’ 
el ToUTO | emxetpot, TOoMay edamtopmevos mavTwv 
dmoruyxdvot av, wor elvat mov eMoyiyos 5 Ti 8° 
ov peree; Oskody Kat TEplL pipynoews 6 avros 
Adyos, 6 ore moAAa 6 adds pypetobau ed womep Ev 
ov duvards ; Od yap otv. LyodAj apa emiTndevdoe 
395 yé Te aya tev agiov Adyou emurnSevpdtony kal 
TroAAa pyajoerae Kat €orar puntucds, ezel mov 
ovde 7a doKxodvTa eyes Ajo elvar S00 puysy- 
para" Svvavrat ot avdrol dua eb pyretoBac, olov 
Kapmdiav Kat Tpaywodlav tovobvTes. 7) oD puyLn- 
para dpre ToUTW exdAets ; "Eywye: at adnOy ye 
Adyets, Tu ob dvvavtTat of avrol. Ovde pv 

paxwdot ye Kal taoxpitat dua. “AAnOn. °AAN’ 

1 wuhwara is more euphonious: some mss. and editors 
read uiunuare. 

@ Again in the special limited sense. 

» This seems to imply that Plato already had in mind the 
extension of the discussion in the tenth book to the whole 
question of the moral effect of poetry and art. 

¢ Cf. Theaetet. 172 pv. But it is very naive to suppose 
that the sequence of Plato’s argument is not carefully 
planned in his own mind. Cf. Unity of Plato’s Thought, : 
p. 5. 

232 : 


each case, or not allow them to imitate? at all.” 
“I divine,’ he said, “that you are considering 
whether we shall admit tragedy and comedy into 
our city or not.” “ Perhaps,” said I, “ and perhaps 
eyen more than that.? For I certainly do not yet 
know myself, but whithersoever the wind, as it were, 
of the argument blows,’ there lies our course.” 
“ Well said,” he replied. ‘‘ This then, Adeimantus, 
is the point we must keep in view, do we wish our 
guardians to be good mimics or not? Or is this 
also a consequence of what we said before, that each 
one could practise well only one pursuit and not 
many, but if he attempted the latter, dabbling in 
many things, he would fail of distinction in all?” 
“ Of course it is.” “ And does not the same rule 
hold for imitation, that the same man is not able to 
imitate many things well as he can one?” “No, 
he is not.” “Still less, then, will he be able to 
combine the practice of any worthy pursuit with the 
imitation of many things and the quality of a mimic ; 
since, unless I mistake, the same men cannot 
practise well at once even the two forms of imitation 
that appear most nearly akin, as the writing of 
tragedy and comedy4*? Did you not just now call 
these two imitations?” “I did, and you are right 
in saying that the same men are not able to succeed 
in both, nor yet to be at once good rhapsodists ¢ and 
actors.” “True. But neither can the same men 

# At the close of the Symposium Socrates constrains 
Agathon and Aristophanes to admit that one who has the 
science (réxvy) of writing tragedy will also be able to write 
comedy. There is for Plato no contradiction, since poetry 
is for him not a science or art, but an inspiration. 

* The rhapsode Ion is a Homeric specialist who cannot 
interpret other poets. Cf. Jon 533 c. 



B ovdé Tou droxpiral Kapdois Te Kal Tpaypdois oi 
abot: mdvra Se Tabra, pipnpara. n ov; Mupy- 
para. Kai é ert ye TOUTWY, @ "Adciwarre, paiverat 
foe eis OpLuKporepa Kataxereppariobat TOO av- 
Oparrov gvors, aor advvaros elvat moAAd Kadds 
pipetoBar, 7 7) avTa éKxeiva mparrew, dv 8) Kal ra 
penpard eotw adadowowpata. “AdAnbéotata, 7 
8° ds. 

VII. Ei dpa. TOV Tp@rov Adyov Siaodooper, 
tovs dvdaxas apiv trav dAAwy maca@v Syuoup- 

C yidv dpeysevous det elvat Sypwvoupyovs eAevbe- 
plas Tihs Tohews mavu dicpiBets Kal pndev dAdo 
emurndevew, 6 O Tt [1 els TotTo Péper, ovdev 57) ddou 
av avrovs dAdo mparrew ovde pyretobar éav dé 
pia@vrat, ptpetobar Ta TovTOLS ™po jKovTa edOds 
€K Taidwv, dv8petous, oddpovas, datous, eAevbé- 
povs, Kal Ta Towra mavra, Ta dé aveAdcdOepa 
pire Trovetv pajre Sewods elva pyjoacbat, panbe 
aAXro pndev THv aicypar, iva Bn €k Tis pupnoews 

D rod elvac drrodatowar. 7 otk HoOnoa, ott at 
funoes, €av eK véwy Toppy Siaredcowow, els 
€0n Te Kal piow kabioravrat Kal Kara oOpa. Kat 
gwvas Kat Kata TIHV Sidvovay ; Kai pdra, 7 8° ds. 
Od 82 éemitpépoper, Fv 8 eyd, dv dapev x7ydeobae 

* Cf. Classical Review, vol. xiv. (1900), pp. 201 ff. 
> Cf. Laws 846x, Montaigne, ‘‘Nostre suffisance est d 
& menues piéces,” Pope, Essay on Criticism, 60: 

One science only will one genius fit, 
So vast is art, so narrow human wit. 
¢ Cf. the fine passage in Laws 817 B jets éomer Tparywolas 
avrot moral, [Pindar] apud Plut. 807 c dnuoupyds edvoulas 
kal dixns. 



be actors for tragedies and comedies *—and all these 
are imitations, are they not?” “ Yes, imitations.” 
“ And to still smaller coinage? than this,in my opinion, 
Adeimantus, proceeds the fractioning of human 
faculty, so as to be incapable of imitating many 
things or of doing the things themselves of which 
the imitations are likenesses.” ‘‘ Most true,” he 

VIII. “ If, then, we are to maintain our original 
principle, that our guardians, released from all other 
crafts, are to be expert craftsmen of civic liberty,° and 
pursue nothing else that does not conduce to this, it 
would not be fitting for these to do nor yet to imitate 
anything else. But if they imitate they should from 
childhood up? imitate what is appropriate to them*— 
men, that is, who are brave, sober, pious, free and 
all things of that kind; but things unbecoming the 
free man they should neither do nor be clever at 
imitating, nor yet any other shameful thing, lest 
from the imitation they imbibe the reality’ Or have 
you not observed that imitations, if continued from 
youth far into life, settle down into habits and 
(second) nature?’ in the body, the speech, and the 
thought?” “Yes, indeed,” said he. “We will 
not then allow our charges, whom we expect to 

4 Cf. 386 a. 

* i.€., Inucovpyots éXevPepias. 

? Cf. infra 606 8, Laws 656 8, 669 B-c, and Burke, 
Sublime and Beautiful iv. 4, anticipating James, Psychology 
ii. pp. 449, 451, and anticipated by Shakespeare’s (Cor. 
1m. ii. 123) 

By my body’s action teach my mind 
A most inherent baseness. 

° Cf. my paper on ics, Medérn, "Erworjun, T.A.P.A. 
vol. xl. (1910) pp. 185 ff. 



Kat Sety adrovds av5pas dyabods yevéobat, yuvatka 
puyetobar avdpas 6 ovras, 7 véav 1) mpeoBurépar, 7) 
avdpt AowWopovperny 7 i) m™pos Beods epilovoar TE Kat 
peyadavxouperny, olojrevnv evdaijova. elvat, 7 ev 
E Evpdopais TE Kab mévbear kat Opyvous exouevgy: 
Kdpvovaav S€ 7) ep@oav iy wdivovoay moAdob Kal 
Sejoopev. Tlavrarace jeev obv, 4S és. Ovdé ye 
dovAas te Kal SovAovs mpdrTovtas 6oa SovAwy. 
Ovde tobTo. Odde Ye avdpas Kakous, as Eouce, 
devhous TE Kal TA evavria mpdrrovras &v viv 87) 
elropev, Kaxnyopobyrds Te Kal KepupdodvTas 
adAjAous Kal aicxpodoyodvras, p<Ovovras om Kat 
396 vidovras, 7) Kat aAAa doa ot towdTor Kal ev 
Oyois Kal év épyois auaptdvovow els avdrovs TE 
Kat eis dAAovs* oluar d5€ oddé pawopevors eOtar€eov 
adopovoby abrovs év Adyous odd’ ev Epyois. ‘yvw- 
oréov prev yap Kal jawvopevous Kal Tmovnpovs 
avdpas TE Kat yuvaixas, mountéov de oddev TOUTWV 
ovde puynTeov. ‘Ady beorara, égn. Tid’; Fv oe 
eyo: xaAxevovras 7 tT aAXo SniioupyoByras: v7 
eAavvovTas Tpurjpets a] KeAevovras Tovrots, H Te 
B do t&v epi Tatra pyenTéov ; Kai 7@s, <pn, 
ois ye ovde mpooexew Tov vodv TouUTwr oddevt 
eێorar; Ti (be; immrous xpeperilovras Kal Tau 
pous puKepévous Kal ToTapLovs popodvras Kat 
Oadatrav KtuToteav Kat Bpovrds Kal mavTa ad Ta 
To.atra  pysnoovrar; °AAX’ azeipyrat adrois, 

® Cf. Laws 816 p-x. 

> For this rejection of violent realism ef. Laws 669 c-p. 
Plato describes precisely what Verhaeren’s admirers approve: 
‘* often in his rhythm can be heard the beat of hammers, the 
hard, edged, regular whizzing of wheels, the whirring of 



prove good men, being men, to play the parts of 
women and imitate a woman young or old wrangling 
with her husband, defying heaven, loudly boasting, 
fortunate in her own conceit, or involved in mis- 
fortune and possessed by grief and lamentation— 
still less a woman that is sick, in love, or in labour.” 
“ Most certainly not,” he replied. “ Nor may they 
imitate slaves, female and male, doing the offices 
of slaves.” “No, not that either.” “* Nor yet, as it 
seems, bad men who are cowards and who do the 
opposite of the things we just now spoke of, reviling 
and lampooning one another, speaking foul words in 
their cups or when sober and in other ways sinning 
against themselves and others in word and deed after 
the fashion of such men. And I take it they must 
not form the habit of likening themselves to madmen 
either in words nor yet in deeds. For while know- 
ledge they must have ¢ both of mad and bad men and 
women, they must do and imitate nothing of this 
kind.” ‘* Most true,” he said. ‘* What of this?” 
I said, ‘‘ —are they to imitate smiths and other crafts- 
men or the rowers of triremes and those who call 
the time to them or other things connected there- 
with?” “How could they,” he said, “since it 
will be forbidden them even to pay any attention 
to such things?” “ Well, then, neighing horses? 
and lowing bulls, and the noise of rivers and the 
roar of the sea and the thunder and everything 
of that kind—will they imitate these?” ‘“ Nay, 

looms, the hissing of locomotives; often the wild, restless 
tumult of streets, the humming and rumbling of dense 
masses of the people” (Stefan Zweig). So another modern 
critic celebrates ** the cry of the baby in a Strauss symphony, 
the sneers and snarls of the critics in his Helden Leben, the 
contortions of the Dragon in Wagner’s Siegfried.” 



epn, pre patvecBau pare pawvoevous ddopowod- 
obae. Ki dp’, Wv 8 eyo, pavOaven a ov Aéyets, 

€oTt TL <l80s Acfecds Te Kal Sunynoews, ev @ av 
C Sunyotro 6 TO ove Kados xayabes, omdre zu Séou 
avrov déyew Kal ETEpOV ad dvs povov TOUT eldos, 
ob av EXOLTO aiel Kal év @ Sinyotro 6 evavTiws 
exetvey dus TE Kal Tpadeis. Tlota 57}, eon, Tavra.; 
‘O pev pou Soxe?, 7 qv & eye, Hérptos dvnp, émevdav 
adixnrar ev TH Sinynoes emt Actw Twa 7 mpagw 
avdpos adyabod, eGeAnjoew ws atros ov éxeivos 
dmrayyeNew Kal ovK aloxuveicbae emt TH TouavTy 
punoer, pddvora peev [yLovpievos Tov ayabov 
D dopahas TE Kat euppoveas: mparTovra., édatrw dé 
Kal Hrrov 7 } v70 voowy 7 070 epwrwv eopahuevov 
7), Kal 770 peOns n Twvos dAAns Evpdopas: érav dé 
ylyyyta Kata Twa éavToo dvdgvov, ovK eBeAjoew 
omovd7 dmeud lew €avTov TO Xelpovr, ei p7), dpa. 
KaTa Bpaxy, érav Te | xpnorov Tou}, adAN aicxu- 
vetobar, dua pev cybuvaoros av Tob pyreto Bau 
TOUS ToLovTous, dua. be Kal Suoxepaivey atrov 
exudrrew Te Kal evoTdavar eis Tods TOV KAKLOVWY 
E TUmous, aryalwy rH Sdvavoia, 6 Te pr madias 
xdpiwv. Eikods, &dn. 
IX. Odkoby Sinyjoeu: Xproerar ola. mpets otyov 
mporepov dup ASopev mept 7a Tob ‘Opzpou é én, Kal 
€orar avtod % A€éis petéxovoa pev apyporépwr, 

@ Chaucer drew from a misapplication of Tim. 29 B or 
Boethius the opposite moral: 

Who so shall telle a tale after a man, 

He most reherse, as neighe as ever he can, 
Everich word, if it be in his charge, 

All speke he never so rudely and so large; 


they have been forbidden,” he said, “ to be mad or 
liken themselves to madmen.” “If, then, I under- 
stand your meaning,” said I, “there is a form of 
diction and narrative in which the really good and 
true man would narrate anything that he had to say, 
and another form unlike this to which the man of 
the opposite birth and breeding would cleave and 
in which he would tell his story.” ‘“ What are these 
forms?” he said. “A man of the right sort, I think, 
when he comes in the course of his narrative to 
some word or act of a good man will be willing 
to impersonate the other in reporting it, and will 
feel no shame at that kind of mimicry, by preference 
imitating the good man when he acts steadfastly 
and sensibly, and less and more reluctantly when he 
is upset by sickness or love or drunkenness or any 
other mishap. But when he comes to someone 
unworthy of himself, he will not wish to liken himself 
in earnest to one who is inferior,* except in the few 
cases where he is doing something good, but will 
be embarrassed both because he is unpractised in 
the mimicry of such characters, and also because he 
shrinks in distaste from moulding and fitting himself 
to the types of baser things. His mind disdains 
them, unless it be for jest.?’” ‘‘ Naturally,” he said. 

IX. “Then the narrative that he will employ will be 
of the kind that we just now illustrated by the verses 
of Homer, and his diction will be one that partakes 

Eke Plato sayeth, who so can him rede, 

The wordes most ben cosin to the dede. 
» Plato, like Howells and some other modern novelists, 
would have thought somewhat gross comedy less harmful 
gan He tragedy or romance that insidiously instils false 




yLToEdds Te Kal THs amAjs* Sinyijoews, opLucpov dé 
TL pépos ev TroAA@ ae, Tijs pysaoews: i) ovdev 
Aéye ; Kai pada, Eby, oldv ye dvayen | Tov TUTOV 
civat Too TowovTou propos. Odkotv, Hv & eye, 
6 p17) ToLodTos ab, dow av davAdtepos 7, mavTa 
Te pGAAov puprjoerac Kal ovdev eavTob avaé.ov 
olnoeTau elvan, wore mavra. ETLXELPTITEL pypetobac 
omoven Te Kal evavtiov moAA@r, Kal a vov 

eAéyouev, Bpovrds te Kai wddous avéuwv TE Kal 
xaralav Kai afdvwy Kal tpoxtAiwy Kal cadmiyywv 
Kal avaA@v Kat cuplyywy Kal mdavTwy dpydvev 
dwvds, Kai ére Kuv@v Kat mpoBdtwv Kal dpvéwy 
hldyyous: Kat €orat 51) 7 TovTov A€~is Gmaca Sid 

Bpurjoews dwvats Te Kal oyjpacw, 7) opiKpov Tt 

dunyjoews €xovoa.; “Avdyen, eon, Kat TooToo. 
Tadra toivur, iy 5’ éyw, éXeyov ta Svo <td) Tis 
Acfews. Kat yap eoTw, edn. Odxodv adrotv TO 
pev opuKpas Tas petaBodas eXEl, Kal édv Tis 
amo5.o@ mpémovcay dippoviay Kat puduov Th AéE«t, 
dXiyou mpos TiHv adtiy ylyvetar Adyew TH OpOds 
A€yovTt Kal ev ud apyovia—opukpat yap at peta- 

C Bodat—xat 57) év pu fiz) aoavTus TapamAnotey 

Tut; Kopwdf pev ovv, eon, ovTws EXEL. Ti dé 
TO TOU ETEpov eldos; od tav evavtiwy Setrat, 
TacGv pev dppovidy, mavrwy Se puduarv, et pweAAe 

= a vate 7 A \ \ \ 
avd oikeiws AéyecPar, dia TO TavTodamas popdas 

~ ~ ” ‘ / id 
Tav petaBorddy exew; Kat ofddpa ye ovrws 

1 ardfjs Adam plausibly: the mss. é\Ays idiomatically, 
“as well.” 

2 The respondent plays on the double meaning of ovéév 
Aéyes and replies, ** Yes indeed, you do say something, 
namely the type and pattern,” ete. 



of both, of imitation and simple narration, but there 
will be a small portion of imitation in a long dis- 
course—or is there nothing in what I say?” “ Yes, 
indeed,* ” he said, “‘that zs the type and pattern of 
such a speaker.” “ Then,” said I, “ the other kind 
of speaker, the more debased he is the less will he 
shrink from imitating anything and everything. He 
will think nothing unworthy of himself, so that he 
will attempt, seriously and in the presence of many,? 
to imitate all things, including those we just now 
mentioned—claps of thunder, and the noise of wind 
and hail and axles and pulleys, and the notes of 
trumpets and flutes and pan-pipes, and the sounds 
of all instruments, and the cries of dogs, sheep, 
and birds; and so his style will depend wholly 
on imitation in voice and gesture, or will con- 
tain but a little of pure narration.”’ “That too 
follows of necessity,” he said. ‘“‘ These, then,” said 
I, “were the two types of diction of which I was 

” “There are those two,” he replied. 
“ Now does not one of the two involve slight varia- 
tions,* and if we assign a suitable pitch and rhythm 
to the diction, is not the result that the right speaker 
speaks almost on the same note and in one cadence 
—for the changes are slight—and similarly in a 
rhythm of nearly the same kind?” ‘Quite so.” 
“But what of the other type? Does it not require 
the opposite, every kind of pitch and all rhythms, if 
it too is to have appropriate expression, since it 
involves manifold forms of variation?’’ “‘ Emphat- 

> Cf. Gorg. 487 8, Euthydem. 305 8, Protag. 323 B. 

* Besides its suggestion of change and reaction the word 
is technical in music for the transition from one harmony 
to another. 

VOL. I R 241 


EXEL. “Ap” obv mavres ot moural Kal ot TU Aéyov- 
Tes TO érépw Toure emTuyxdvovor TUm@ THs 
Actews 7] TO érépw 7 e& dpdorepev twit évykepay- 

D vOvTES ; "Avdyxn, ey. Te obv Toujoopev ; jv & 

eye: moTepov eis Thy mohw mavras touvrous mapa- 
defopeba. 7 «TOV dcpdrov TOV erepov 7 TOV 
KeKpapLevor ; "Edy x eun, edn, vuKG, Tov Too 
ETLELKODS [LLLNTIV dkparov. "Aa pHv, @ *Adei- 
parte, HOvs ye Kal 6 KeKpapevos, mod dé jOuoTos 
Tatol TE Kal TaLdaywyots 6 evayTios ob atpet 
Kal TO Thetore oxAy. “Hé.0T0s yap. "AA’ 
tows, iv. 8 éyd, odk ay avrov dpyorrew gains 

ErH TpETe pa. moXureia, OTL OVK EOTL Sumods dvip 


Tap" npiv ovde roMamdobs, erred) EKQOTOS EV 
mparrec. Ov yap obv dpporret. OdkKoiv da 
OKUTOTOHLOV edpjoopev Kat od xuBepynrny mpos TH 
okuToTopia, «al TOV ‘yewpyov yewpyov Kal ov 
duKaoTnv m™pos Th yewpyia, Kal Tov TroAEptKoV 
TroAepuKov Kal ov Xpnpatiarny mpos Th Trohepurh, 
kal TavTas ovTw ; ’"AdAnOA, ébn. “Avdpa 87, ws 
EouKe, dvvdpevov b bo cogias Tmavrodamov ylyveoBar 
Kal pyretoban TavTA XpHpata, €b jpy adiko.To 
eis THY moAW adtés TE Kal Ta TOU LATA Bov- 
Adjrevos emdeEaobar, TpooKvvoipev av avrov as 
tepov Kal Bavpacrov Kat 70vv, ei7rouev 5 av 
6tTt ovK EaTL ToOLOdTOS avnp ev TH moXeu map” Hpeiv 
ovd€ Oéuis eyyevéobar, drroméuTrousev Te €is GAAP 

® The reverse of the Periclean ideal. Cf. Thucyd. ii. 41. 

> The famous banishment of Homer, sepatded as the 
prototype of the tragedian. Cf. 568 a-c, 595 8B, 605, 
607 pv, Laws 656 c, 817 B. 



ically so.” “‘ And do all poets and speakers hit upon 
one type or the other of diction or some blend which 
they combine of both?” “ They must,” he said. 
“What, then,” said I, “are we to do? Shall we 
admit all of these into the city, or one of the unmixed 
types, or the mixed type?” “‘ If my vote prevails,” 
he said, “ the unmixed imitator of the good.” “ Nay, 
but the mixed type also is pleasing, Adeimantus, and 
far most pleasing to boys and their tutors and the 
great mob is the opposite of your choice.” “ Most 
pleasing it is.’ “ But perhaps,” said I, “ you would 
affirm it to be ill-suited to our polity, because there is 
no twofold or manifold man* among us, since every 
man does one thing.” ‘It isnot suited.” “ And is 
this not the reason why such a city is the only one in 
which we shall find the cobbler a cobbler and not a 
pilot in addition to his cobbling, and the farmer a 
farmer and not a judge added to his farming, and 
the soldier a soldier and not a money-maker in addi- 
tion to his soldiery, and so of allthe rest?” “ True,” 
hesaid. “°Ifa man, then, it seems, who was capable 
by his cunning of assuming every kind of shape and 
imitating all things should arrive in our city, bringing 
with himself* the poems which he wished to exhibit, 
we should fall down and worship him as a holy and 
wondrous and delightful creature, but should say to 
him that there is no man of that kind among us in 
our city, nor is it lawful for such a man to arise 
among us, and we should send him away to another 

* Greek idiom achieves an effect impossible to English 
here, by the shift from the co-ordination of romjuara with 
atrés to the treatment of it as the object of émdeltac@a: and 
the possible double use of the latter as middle with airés 

and transitive with romuara. Cf. for a less striking example 
427 pv, Phaedr. 250 B-c. 



7ohw pvpov Kata Tis xepadjs KaTaxeavres kal 
épiw orébavtes, adtol 8 av TO abornporepy Kal 
B dndeorepyy mounrh xpppeBa. Kat pvbordyp ape- 
Actas € evena,, Os Hiv THY Tob emverkods Act pLyotTo 
kal Ta Aeyopeva réyou ev exelvors Tots TU7oLs, ols 
Kat’ apyas évopnobernoducba, Ste Tods oTpaTia- 
Tas emrexetpodpev madevew. Kat pad’, edn, ovTws 
av trovotpev, et ef? Hey ein. Nov 3%, elmov eyo, 
® dire, Kuduvedet Huiv THs povoihs TO mrept 
Adyous TE Kal pvGous mavrehas SiarremepavOat: a 
re yap Aexréov Kal os A|exréov, elpyrar. Kat 
adT@ por Soxet, &dy. 

C X. Odxodv pera tob70, Hv 8 eyw, To mEpt PdFs 
tpomov Kal peAdv Aowrdv; AAa 8H. *Ap’ odv 
od mas 7On av evpor, & Hiv AeKTéov wept adbrav, 
oia Set elvar, eimep péeAAopmev Tots mpoeipyevots 
ovpdwvncew; Kat 6 TAavewv éemvyeAdoas, “Eye 
towuv, €dn, @ UwKpates, Kkwdvvedw exTOs TOV 
mavTwy elvar: ovKouy ixavas ve exw ev TO Trapovre 
EvuPadéobar, Tot aTTa bet 9 Has Aeyew, ¥ dromrevay 
HeVvToL. Ildvrws dijrov, Wy oe eyo, mpa@rov pev 
Téd€ txavas exeis A€yew, Ott TO peAos EK TPLOV 
€otl ouyKelpevov, Adyou Te Kal dppovias Kal 
pb pod. Nat, én, tobTo ye. Odxodv daov ve 
avrod Adyos éoriv, ovdev _Onrou Suapeper Too 
pt) Gopuevov Adyou mpds TO €v Tots adrots Seiv 

@ Cf. from a different point of view Arnold’s The Austerity 
of Poetry. 

> Cf. 379 a ff. 

¢ He laughs at his own mild joke, which Professor 
Wilamowitz (Platon ii. p. 192) does not understand. Cf. Laws 


ae . - eer 


city, after pouring myrrh down over his head and 
crowning him with fillets of wool, but we ourselves, 
for our souls’ good, should continue to employ the 
more austere? and less delightful poet and tale-teller, 
who would imitate the diction of the good man and 
would tell his tale in the patterns which we pre- 
scribed in the beginning,” when we set out to educate 
our soldiers.” “We certainly should do that if it 
rested with us.” “ And now, my friend,” said I, 
“we may say that we have completely finished the 
part of music that concerns speeches and tales. For 
we have set forth what is to be said and how it is to 
be said.”” “ I think so too,” he replied. 

X. “ After this, then,” said I, “‘ comes the manner 
of song and tunes?” “Obviously.” “ And having 
gone thus far, could not everybody discover what 
we must say of their character in order to con- 
form to what has already been said?” “I am 
afraid that ‘everybody’ does not include me,” 
laughed Glaucon‘; “I cannot sufficiently divine off- 
hand what we ought to say, though I have a sus- 
picion.” “ You certainly, I presume,” said I, “‘ have 
a sufficient understanding of this—that the song? is 
composed of three things, the words, the tune, and 
the rhythm?” “Yes,” said he, “that much.” 
“And so far as it is words, it surely in no manner 
differs from words not sung in the requirement of 

859 ©, Hipp. Major 293 a 4 ody els ray axdvrwy Kai ‘HpaxdFs 
i ; and in a recent novel, ‘I am afraid everybody does not 
include me,’ she smiled.” 

4 The complete song includes words, rhythm, and 
“harmony,” tis, a pitch system of high and low notes. 
Harmony is also used technically of the peculiar Greek 
system of scales or modes. Cf. Monro, Modes of Ancient 
Greek Music. 



tUmois A€yecBar ols adpre TpoetzrojLev Kat do- 
avrors j "Adn OA, €bn. Kai pay THY ‘ye dppoviav 
Kal pubwov akodovletv Set 7@ Aoyw. lds 8 ov; 
"AMa pevroe Opjvwv Te Kat ddupyadv edapev ev 
Adyous oB8ey mpoadetabar. Od yap obv. Tives obv 

E Opnvdiders apyoviar; Aéye prorr od yap povorkds. 


Mi€oAvdiori, €byn, Kal ovvtovodAvdioti Kal Tot- 
~ / ~ = > > 7 > / 
adrai twes. Odxodv adrar, jv 8 éya, adaperéat: 
axypnoro. yap Kal yuvaély as det emuerets elvat, 

A a > / / 
py) OTe dvSpdow. lav ye. "Ada pny pen ye 
puragiv dmpeméoratov Kat padakia Kal dpyia. 
Ils yap od; Tives ody padaxat te Kal cupo- 
‘ ~ ¢ ~ > la > @ ‘ / 
Tikal TOV appoudv; “laori, 4 8° ds, Kai Avd.oTi, 
aitwes xaAapal Kadodvrar. Tatras ody, & dire, 
> \ ~ > ~ ” es. ae / > 
émt troAcuik@v avdpav eof’ 6 tu xphoe; Odda- 
~ »” > \ yf \ / 
was, é¢n: adda Kwdvvever cot Supuort AcimeoBat 
Kal dpvytori. Ovdx oida, edny € ey, Tas dppovias, 
GAAa Karddevre exeivny THY appoviav, 7 & Te 

2 The poets at first composed their own music to fit the 
words. When, with the further development of music, there 
arose the practice of distorting the words, as in a mere libretto, 
it provoked a storm of protest from conservatives in aesthetics 
and morals. 

>’ The modes of Greek music are known to the English 
reader only from Milton’s allusions, his ‘*Lap me in soft 
Lydian airs” and, P.L. i. 549 f., his 

Anon they move 
In perfect phalanx to the Dorian mood 
Of flutes and soft recorders ; such as raised 
To highth of noblest temper heroes old. 

The adaptation of particular modes, harmonies or scales to 
the expression of particular feelings is something that we are 
obliged to accept on faith. Plato’s statements here were 
challenged by some later critics, but the majority believed 
that there was a real connexion between modes of music 




conformity to the patterns and manner that we have 
prescribed?” “True,” he said. ‘‘ And again, the 
music and the rhythm must follow the speech.*” 
“ Of course.” “‘ But we said we did not require 
rs and lamentations in words.” ‘‘ We do not.” 
* at, then, are the dirge-like modes of music? Tell 
me, for you are a musician.” “The mixed Lydian,? ” 
he said, “ and the tense or higher Lydian, and similar 
modes.” “ These, then,” said I, “ we must do away 
with. For they are useless even to women ® who are 
to make the best of themselves, let alone to men.” 
“ Assuredly.” “‘ But again, drunkenness is a thing 
most unbefitting guardians, and so is softness and 
sloth.” ‘“‘ Yes.” ‘“‘ What, then, are the soft and eon- 
vivial modes ?”’ “ There are certain Ionian and also 
Lydian modes that are called lax.” “* Will you make 
any use of them for warriors?” “ None at all,” he 
said; “but it would seem that you have left the 
Dorian and the Phrygian.” “I don’t know? the 
musical modes,” I said, “but leave us that mode @ 
that would fittingly imitate the utterances and the 

and modes of feeling, as Ruskin and many others have in 
our day. The hard-headed Epicureans and sceptics denied 
it, as well as the moral significance of music generally. 

© Cf. 387 £. 

@ Plato, like a lawyer or popular essayist, affects ignorance 
of the technical details; or perhaps rather he wishes to 
disengage his main principle from the specialists’ controversy 
about particular modes of music and their names. 

* éxelyny may mean, but does not say, Dorian, which the 
Laches (188 p) pronounces the only true Greek harmony.* 

This long anacoluthic sentence sums up the whole matter 
with impressive repetition and explicit enumeration of all 
types of conduct in peace and war, and implied reference to 
Plato’s doctrine of the two fundamental temperaments, the 
swift and the slow, the energetic and the mild. Cf. Unity of 
Plato’s Thought, nn. 59, 70, 481. 



trode maker OvTos avdpetov Kal ev maon Bratw 
epyacia TMpeTovTws av pynjoarro Pldyyous TE Kal 
mpoowdias, Kab dmoTuxovros, H «is a 7 
eis Gavdrous idvTos 7, els Twa aAAnv Evppopav 
B TEOVTOS, ev maou Tovrots mapareTaypeves Kal 
KapTepovvTws _ Gysvvopevou Thy TUXNV: «al aAAnv 
av ev <tpnvurch Te Kal 7) Braiw aad’ év Exovotw 
mpdger 0 évTos, 7 TWA TL metBovros TE Kal Seopevov, 
7 <vXT) Beov 7 didayh Kal voubeTHcet dvOpwrov, 7) 7 
TovVavTiov io Seopevw 7 SiddoKovTe 7) peTa-~ 
meiGovrt éautov éréxovra,' kal ex ToUTwY mpdfavTa 
Kata votv, Kat pa) vrepndadvws €xovta, adda 
awhpovws Te Kal peTpiws ev Got ToUTOLS mpdT- 
C tovrd te Kal Ta azoBaivovra ayan@vra. tavras 
dvo dppovias, Piaov, Eexovowov, dvotvyotvTwr, 
edTUXOUYTWY, GwHpdvwr, avdpeiwv [dppyovias] at- 
TWES POoyyous pyenjoovra kdddora, TavTas Acizre. 
°AA’," 7 8 Os, OvK dAAas aireis Acirrew, as 
vov SH ey edeyov. Ovd« dpa, iy oe eYa, | 7roAv- 
xopdias ye ovde tavappoviov jpiv Senoe ev Tats 
woats TE kal péheow. Ov pot, eon, paiverar. 
Tprydvew a dpa Kal anxrideoy Kal TavTwy Spydvev, 
D dca zodvyopda Kai 7odvappovia, Snproupyods ov 
Opéppopev. Od pawopeba. Ti 8é; avroroovs 7) 7 
avAntas mapadeeer ets THY modu ; 7 ov TovTO 
moAvxopdoratov, Kal avTa Ta mravappovee. avAob 
TU Xaver ovTa pina ; AjjAa 87, 7 8 ds. Avpa 
87 cor, Av 8 eyw, Kai Kibdpa AeiweTat Kal Kara 
+ éxéxovra has most ms. authority, but vréxovra or wap- 
éxovra is more normal Greek for the idea. 
* Cf. Laws 814 £. 
» Metaphorically. The ‘“ many-toned instrumentation of 


accents of a brave man who is engaged in warfare 
or in any enforced business, and who, when he has 
failed, either meeting wounds or death or having 
fallen into some other mishap, in all these condi- 
tions confronts fortune with steadfast endurance and 
repels her strokes. And another for such a man 
engaged in works of peace, not enforced but volun- 
tary,’ either trying to persuade somebody of some- 
thing and imploring him—whether it be a god, 
through prayer, or a man, by teaching and admoni- 
tion—or contrariwise yielding himself to another who 
is petitioning or teaching him or trying to change his 
opinions, and in consequence faring according to his 
wish, and not bearing himself arrogantly, but in all 
this acting modestly and moderately and acquiescing 
in the outcome. Leave us these two modes—the 
enforced and the voluntary—that will best imitate the 
utterances of men failing or succeeding, the temper- 
ate, the brave—leave us these.” ‘‘ Well,” said he, 
“you are asking me to leave none other than those 
I just spoke of.” “‘ Then,” said I, “ we shall not need 
in our songs and airs instruments of many strings or 
whose compass includes all the harmonies.” ‘‘ Notin 
my opinion,” said he. “*‘ Then we shall not maintain 
makers of triangles and harps and all other many- 
stringed and poly-harmonic® instruments.” “ Ap- 
parently not.” “Well, will you admit to the city 
flute-makers and flute-players? Oris not the flute the 
most “many-stringed ’ of instruments and do not the 
pan-harmonics ° themselves imitate it?” “* Clearly,” 
he said. “ You have left,” said I, “the lyre and the 

the flutes,’ as Pindar calls it, Ol. vii. 12, can vie with the 
most complex and many-stringed lyre of musical innovation. 
© Cf. 404 p, the only other occurrence of the word in Plato. 



Trékw xphouas Kat ad Kat’ dypods Tots vopetot 
avpry€ av tis ein. ‘Qs yodv, én, 6 Adyos Hiv 

Eonpaive. Ovdev ye, Hv 8 eyw, Kawov rowdper, 
s / / A > / ‘ \ a? / 
® dire, xpivovtes tov “AmodAAw Kai Ta Tod "Amdd- 
Awvos dpyava po Mapovou te Kal t&v éxeivou 
> / \ Led > a ” , 
dpydveov. Ma Av’, 4H 8 ds, od por datvoueba. 
Kat vy Tov xkvva, elzov, AcAjfapev ye dia- 
Kalaipovres maAw qv apte tpudav epayev modAw. 
Lwdpovobvrés ye jets, 7 8 Gs. 

XI. "16 84, edynv, Kat ta Aowra Kabaipwper. 
Eopevov yap 87) Tals appoviats av yuiv ein TO 
Trept pubuovs, un Toxidous adrods SiwKew pndé 
mavrodatas Paces, adda Biov puOpmods ideiv 
Koopiov te Kal avdpeiov tives eiciv ods iddvra 

400 rov mdda 7H Towovrov Adyw avayKdlew Eemecbar 

‘ ‘ / > A A / / ‘ A 
kat TO peAos, GAA put) Adyov modi Te Kai péAet. 
oitwves 8° av elev odor of puluol, cov Epyov, domep 

\ ¢ , , > \ \ eed > 
Tas dppovias, dpdoa. “AAAa pa Av’, édn, odK 
éyw Aéyew. Sr pev yap tpl arra éoriv eidn, e€ 
dv at Baoes wA€Kovrar, womep ev Tots POdyyots 
TéTtapa, lev at macar dppyoviar, reOeapevos av 

2 Cf. my note on Tim. 47 c, in A.J.P. vol. x. p. 61. 

> Ancient critics noted this sentence as an example of 
adaptation of sound to sense. Cf. Demetr. Ilepi épu. 185. 
The sigmas and iotas may be fancied to suggest the whistling 
notes of the syrinx. So Lucretius v. 1385 “tibia quas 
fundit digitis pulsata canentum.” Cf. on Catull. 61. 13 
‘*voce carmina tinnula.”’ 

¢ The so-called Rhadamanthine oath to avoid taking the 
names of the gods in vain. Cf. 592 a, Apol. 21 £, Blaydes 
on Aristoph. Wasps 83. 

4 Cf. 372. Diimmler, Proleg. p. 62, strangely affirms 
that this is an express retractation of the d\n#wy rods. This 
is to misapprehend Plato’s method. He starts with the in- 
dispensable minimum of a simple society, develops it by 



either. These are useful? in the city, and in the fields 
the shepherds would have a little piccolo to pipe on.’” 
“So our argument indicates,” he said. “We are not 
innovating, my friend, in preferring Apollo and the 
‘instruments of Apollo to Marsyasandhisinstruments.” 
“No, by heaven!” he said, “I think not.” “And by 
the dog,’” said I, “we have all unawares purged the 
city which a little while ago we said was luxurious.*” 
“In that we show our good sense,” he said. 

XI. “ Come then, let us complete the purification. 
For upon harmonies would follow the consideration of 
rhythms: we must not pursue complexity nor great 
variety in the basic movements,’ but must observe 
what are therhythms of a life that is orderly and brave, 
and after observing them require the foot and the air 
to conform to that kind of man’s speech and not 
the speech to the foot and the tune. What those 
rhythms would be, it is for you to tell us as you did 
the musical modes.” “‘ Nay, in faith,” he said, “ I 
cannot tell. For that there are some three forms‘ 
from which the feet are combined, just as there are 
four’ in the notes of the voice whence come all 
harmonies, is a thing that I have observed and could 

Herbert Spencer’s multiplication of effects into an ordinary 
Greek city, then reforms it by a reform of education and 
finally transforms it into his ideal state by the rule of the 
philosopher kings. Cf. Introd. p. xiv. 

* Practically the feet. 

? According to the ancient musicians these are the equal as 
e.g. in dactyls (— » v), spondees (— —) and anapaests (Uv —), 
where the foot divides into two equal quantities; the } ratio, 
as in the so-called cretic (— ~ —); the } as in the iamb (vu —) 
and trochee (—v). Cf. Aristid. Quint. i. pp. 34-35. 

9 Possibly the four notes of the tetrachord, but there is no 
agreement among experts. Cf. Monro, Modes of Ancient 
Greek Music. 



etrroye mota 5é molov Biov YLT Lare., Aéyew ovke 
Béyw. “AANA tadra per, Hv €yw, Kal pera. 
kip Bovrevodpeba, tives TE dvehevBepias Kal 
vBpews 7 _pavias Kat _ ans Kaklas mpémovcat 

Bdoes, Kai tivas tots evavrious Aewrréov prbpous. 

oluat dé pe den ko€vat od cadds evorrAudv Té Twa. 
dvopdlovros avToo EvvOerov Kat Sdxrudov Kat 
np@ov ye, odK olda Omws StakocpobvtTos Kai tcov 
avw Kat Kdtw TiWevTos, eis Bpayt te Kal paxpov 
yeyvopevov, Kal, ws ey@pan, tapBov Kal tw aAdov 
C tpoxatov avopate, enn dé Kal Bpaxdrnras m™poo- 
qmre* Kal tovTwy tisiv olwar tas dywyas Tob 
7080s avrov ovx WyrTov apeyew TE Kal émrawweiv 7 
Tous _ pubpovs avtous, rou Evvapddrepov TU ou 
yap €xw Aéyew. adda Tabra per, dorrep elmov, els 
Adpwva dvaBeBAjobes dveAdoBau yap ov opuKpod 
Adyou 7) ov olen ; Ma A?, ovK eyarye. 

700€ ye, OTL TO THS evoxnpoovvns TE Kal aoxnjo 
avvns TH edpvOum Te Kal dppvbuen dodovbe, 
Sivacar SuedAécbar; lds 8 ov; AAG ey TO 

* Modern psychologists are still debating the question. 

> The Platonic Socrates frequently refers to Damon as his 
musical expert. Cf. Laches 200 b, infra 424c, Alc. I. 118 c. 

¢ There is a hint of satire in this disclaimer of expert 
knowledge. Cf. 399 a. There is no agreement among 
modern experts with regard to the precise form of the so- 
called enoplios. Cf. my review of Herkenrath’s “ Der 
Enoplios,’’ Class. Phil. vol. iii. p. 360, Goodell, Chapters on 
Greek Metric, pp. 185 and 189, Blaydes on Aristoph. 
Nubes 651. 

4 Possibly foot, possibly rhythm. éd«7vAov seems to mean 
the foot, while jpwos is the measure based on dactyls but 
admitting spondees. 


i i i 


tell. But which are imitations of which sort of life, 
I am unable to say.*”’ “Well,” said I, “on this 
point we will take counsel with Damon,’ too, as to 
which are the feet appropriate to illiberality, and 
insolence or madness or other evils, and what 
rhythms we must leave for their opposites; and 
I believe I have heard him obscurely speaking ¢ of a 
foot that he called the enoplios, a composite foot, 
and a dacty] and an heroic? foot, which he arranged, 
I know not how, to be equal up and down? in the 
interchange of long and short,f and unless I am 
mistaken he used the term iambic, and there was 
another foot that he called the trochaic, and he added 
the quantities long and short. Andinsome of these, 
I believe, he censured and commended the tempo 
of the foot no less than the rhythm itself, or else some 
combination of the two; I can’t say. But, as I said, 
let this matter be postponed for Damon’s considera- 
tion. For to determine the truth of these would 
require no little discourse. Do you think otherwise?” 
“No, by heaven, I do not.” “ But this you are able 
to determine—that seemliness and unseemliness are 
attendant upon the good rhythm and the bad.” 
“ Of course.” “‘ And, further,’ that good rhythm and 

* dvw xai xdrw is an untranslatable gibe meaning literally 
and technically the upper and lower half of the foot, the 
arsis and thesis, but idiomatically meaning topsy-turvy. 
There is a similar play on the idiom in Phileb. 43 a and 43 B. 

? Literally ‘‘ becoming” or “issuing in long and short,” 
long, that is, when a spondee is used, short when a dactyl. 

9 Plato, as often, employs the forms of an argument pro- 
ceeding by minute links to accumulate synonyms in illustra- 
tion of a moral or aesthetic analogy. He is working up to 
the Wordsworthian thought that order, harmony, and beauty 
in nature and art are akin to these qualities in the soul. 



D cdpvOudv ye Kal rd dppvOuov rd pev TH KadF 

Ager Ererar dporovpevov, TO S€ TH evavria, Kal TO 
evdpuootov Kal avdppootov woattws, «lmep pu- 
/ A c / , a * 2\ 7 
Ouds ye Kal dppovia Adyw, womep apt eAdyeTo, 
> \ 4 /, 4 > A / > 4 
aAXra pr Adyos Todros. "Aa pv, 7 8 Gs, 
ee SF , > , , Rr ce /, “~ 
Tatra ye Adyw axodovOnréov. Ti 8 6 tpdmo0s Tijs 
A / 8° > , Pal Xr , , > ~ a ~S 
eLews, Hv 8° éyw, Kat 6 Adyos; od TH THs buy7s 

” ~ “~ 

noe. emerar; Ids yap ov; TH dé AdEa raAda; 
f ? , ” \ ) / ‘ > 

Nat. EvAoyia dpa Kai evappooria Kai evoyn- 

E poovvn Kat edpv0uia edynbeia axodovbet, ody Hv 


” ‘os ¢ / a ¢ > 
avotav ovcav vmoKxopilouevor Kadodpev ws €v- 
~ ~ ‘ 
HOevav, ddAa THY ws GAnOds €b te Kal Kadds TO 
700s Kateckevacpernv Sdidvorav. Llavrdmace pev 
obv, edn. “Ap” odv od mavtayod tabta SiuwKréa 
Tots véois, et eAXovar TO adtav mpdtrew; Aw- 
/ \ s ” A /, / A 
Ktea prev ovv. “Hote 5€ ye mov mAnpyns pev 
ypadiky adtt@v Kal maoa 7) Tovav’Tn Syp.oupyio, 
r , \ ¢ \ \ / \ > >) , 
TAnpns dé bhavTiK?) Kai mouirla Kai oikodopia 
\ a @ £ an »” a > LZ ” \ 
Kat Taca ad 7) TOV dAAwv oKxevdv épyacia, ert dé 
€ ~ / 7 \ ¢ ~ + ~ 
) TOV cwudTrwy duos Kal 7} Tov GAAwy duTav: 
ێv maou yap TovTos eveotw edoxnpoovvn 7 aox7n- 
pootvn. Kal 7 pev doynpwootvn Kal appvbpia Kal 
> / / \ , > / 
dvappootia KakoAoyias Kal KaKxonbeias adeAdd, 
7a 8 evavtia tod éevavtiov, awdpovds Te Kal 

2 Plato recurs to the etymological meaning of evjGea. 
Cf. on 343 c. 

> The Ruskinian and Wordsworthian generalization is ex- 
tended from music to all the fine arts, including, by the way, 




bad rhythm accompany, the one fair diction, as- 
similating itself thereto, and the other the opposite, 
and so of the apt and the unapt, if, as we were just 
now saying, the rhythm and harmony follow the © 
words and not the words these.” “ They certainly 
must follow the speech,” he said. “‘ And what of the 
manner of the diction, and the speech?”’ said I. 
“ Do they not follow and conform to the disposition 
of the soul?” “‘ Of course.” “ And all the rest to 
the diction?’’ “Yes.” “ Good speech, then, good 
accord, and good grace, and good rhythm wait upon 
a good disposition, not that weakness of head which 
we euphemistically style goodness of heart, but the 
truly good and fair disposition of the character and 
the mind.*” “By all means,” he said. “ And must 
not our youth pursue these everywhere ® if they are 
to do what it is truly theirs to do‘?” ‘‘ They must 
indeed.” “And there is surely much of these 
qualities in painting and in all similar craftsmanship 4 
—weaving is full of them and embroidery and archi- 
tecture and likewise the manufacture of household 
furnishings and thereto the natural bodies of animals 
and plants as well. For in all these there is grace or 
gracelessness. And gracelessness and evil rhythm 
and disharmony are akin to evil speaking and the evil 
temper, but the opposites are the symbols and the 
architecture (oixodouia), which Butcher (Aristotle's Theory 
of Poetry, p. 138) says is ignored by Plato and Aristotle. 

* Their special task is to cultivate the true ei#@e:a in their 
souls, For 7d airév xpdrrew here cf. 443 c-p. 

# The following page is Plato's most eloquent statement of 
Wordsworth’s, Ruskin’s, and Tennyson’s gospel of beauty 
for the education of the young. He repeats it in Laws 668 s. 
Cf. my paper on “Some Ideals of Education in Plato’s 
Republic,” Educational Bi-monthly, vol. ii. (1907-1908) 
pp. 215 ff. 





> ~ 
ayalod 7Oovs, adeAda tre Kai piujyata. Llav- 
TEADS pev obv, Edn. 
XII. *Ap’ obv rots mounrats Hiv pdvov ém- 
~ > ~ 
atatytéov Kal mpocavayKaotéov tiv ToD ayalod 
> A a i 
eixova 70ous eurovetvy Tots Trowjpacw 7H py Tap 
e ~ ~ ~ a > 
nuty roveiv, 7 Kal Tots aAAows Syptovpyots emt- 
oraTytéov Kal Siaxwdvtéov TO KaKoyfes TodTO Kat 
> A > 
axdAacrov Kai aveAcvOepov Kal adoxnpwov pATE eV 
etxoot Cawy pnte ev oiKodopjpact pire ev 
aA ‘A / 
pndevt Snptovpyoupevw eurroreiv, 7) 6 pr olds TE 
~ ~ % > 
av ovKk éatéos Trap’ nuiv Snpoupyetv, iva pr ev 
a 7 
kakilas eikdor Tpedopevor Huiv of dvAaKes WoTep 
~ A 
ev kaky Botdvn, moAAa EexdoTns epas KaTa 
~ / 
apuKpov amo ToAA@v Speropevol Te Kal vem“opevot, 
a 4 / A , > ~ 
ev te Evviordvtes AavOdvwor KaKkov péya ev TH 
€ ~ ~ > > > / / A 
abtav vy: aA eéxelvous Cnrnréov rods Snt- 
oupyovs Tovs edpva@s Suvayevovus iyvedew THY TOO 
~ A > / , o>? o > 
KaAobd te Kal evoxnpovos duvow, ty womep ev 
byvew@ ToTw oiKodvTes of véot amd TavTOS 
dhedAdvrar, o7dbev adv adtrots amo tav Kaddv 
” a“ 4 y+ bal ‘ 9 , 4 
épywv 7) mpos oyu  mpds akonv TL mpooBadAn, 
woTep avpa Pépovea amo xpyoTav Tomwy vyievay, 
‘ > A > / 4 >. e / ‘4 
Kat ev0ds ex mratdwv Aavbdvn «is OpoidTnTa TE 
A 7 A / ~ ~ / 4 
Kal diAdlav Kat Evpudwviav TH Kad@® Aoyw adyovoa; 
IloAd yap dv, é6n, kdAdora odtw tpadeiev. *Ap’ 
‘ > > > / > 4 , cA 
obv, Hv 8 eyw, ® TAavcwr, rovTwv Evexa Kupiw- 
TAT) €v povaoiKH Tpody, OTL pdAvoTa KaTadveTat 




kin of the opposites, the sober and good disposition.” 
“ Entirely so,” he said. 

XI. “Is it, then, only the poets that we must 
supervise and compel to embody in their poems the 
semblance of the good character or else not write poetry 
among us,or must we keep watch over the other crafts- 
men, and forbid them to represent the evil disposition, 
the licentious, the illiberal, the graceless, either in 
the likeness of living creatures or in buildings or in 
any other product of their art, on penalty, if unable to 
obey, of being forbidden to practise their art among 
us, that our guardians may not be bred among 
symbols of evil, as it were in a pasturage of poisonous 
herbs, lest grazing freely and cropping from many 
such day by day they little by little and all unawares 
accumulate and build up a huge mass of evil in their 
own souls. But we must look for those craftsmen 
who by the happy gift of nature are capable of 
following the trail of true beauty and grace, that 
our young men, dwelling as it were in a salubrious 
region, may receive benefit from all things about 
them, whence the influence that emanates from works 
of beauty may waft itself to eye or ear like a breeze 
that brings from wholesome places health, and so 
from earliest childhood insensibly guide them to 
likeness, to friendship, to harmony with beautiful 
reason.” “‘ Yes,” he said, “ that would be far the 
best education for them.” ‘ And is it not for this 
reason, Glaucon,” said I, “ that education in music 
is most sovereign,* because more than anything else 

* Schopenhauer, following Plato, adds the further meta- 
physical reason that while the other arts imitate the external 
mer n of the universal Will, music represents the 

ill itself. 

VOL. I s 257 


> 94.9 ‘ a =~ ¢ ¢ ‘ 4 Ee , 
eis TO evTos THs puyis 6 Te puOuds Kal dppovia, 
Kal éppwuevéotata amretar atris, P€povta THV 
evoxnpoavyny, Kal movet edaxnpova, eav Tis Oplds 

fol > \ /, > , ‘ a Cy ~ 
Etpady, et d€ py, todvavtiov; Kat OTL ad TaV 


/ \ \ ~ / 
mapaAeiTrouevwv Kal pn KadAds Snurovpynbevtwr 
a \ ~ F > 4 b oe, > / cc a 
Q py KaAds dvvtwv o€dTar’ av aicbdvoito 6 exe? 

‘ ¢ lA \ > ~ \ / A 
tpadels ws eer, Kai dpbds 87 Svoxepaivwv Ta 
pev kada érrawot Kal yalpwv Kal KaTadexopevos 
eis THY Puy tpépoir av am’ adTav Kal ylyvowto 

/ > / \ > > ‘ 4 7 4 > ~ 
Kadds Te Kayabds, Ta 8° aioxpa Yéyou 7 av dpbds 
Kal puucot éTe véos wy, mplv Adyov Svvatdos elvat 
a > 4 \ ~ / > 4 7 fn pF 3% 
AaBeiv, eAPdvtos 5¢€ Tod Adyou aomalotr’ av adrov 
yrapilwv d” oikedtnTa uddAvoTa 6 ovTw Tpadeis; 
’Epot yotv doxet, édn, T&v ToiovTwy evexa ev 
~ ¢€ , ov a > > tA 
povaiky elvat 4» Tpody. “Qomep dpa, iv 8 eye, 
ypapypatwv mép. tote ikav@s elyouev, OTE Ta 
ato.xeia p17) AavOdvor yds oAlya OvTa ev dmacw 
> ~ 
ols €or. mrepipepdpeva, Kal oT ev ouiKp@ ovr 
> an > i > / e > Yd > Og 
ev peydAw nTyudlopev adra, ws od déor aicba- 
> ‘ ~ > A 7 
veobar, aAAd travtaxod mpodbupotvpeba Siayvyved- 
OKEW, Ws oD TMpPOTEpoV EGdpEvOL ypapaTLKOL mpl 
a A > aA > ~ \ > , 
oUTWws €xoLpmev. AdnO9.  Odxodv Kai eixovas 

* Of. supra 362 8, 366 c, 388 a, 391 ©, and Ruskin’s 
paradox that taste is the only morality. 

» Cf. Laws 653 B-c, where Plato defines education by this 
principle. Aristotle virtually accepts it (2thies ii. 3.2). The 
Stoics somewhat pedantically laid it down that reason 
entered into the youth at the age of fourteen. 

¢ Plato often employs letters or elements (crowxeia) to 



rhythm and harmony find their way to the inmost 
soul and take strongest hold upon it, bringing with 
them and imparting grace, if one is rightly trained, 
and otherwise the contrary? And further, because 
omissions and the failure of beauty in things badly 
made or grown would be most quickly perceived by 
one who was properly educated in music, and so, 
feeling distaste? rightly, he would praise beautiful 
things and take delight in them and receive them 
into his soul to foster its growth and become himself 
beautiful and good. The ugly he would rightly dis- 
approve of and hate while still young and yet unable 
to apprehend the reason, but when reason came? 
the man thus nurtured would be the first to give 
her welcome, for by this affinity he would know her.” 
“ I certainly think,”’ he said, “ that such is the cause 
of education in music.” “ It is, then,” said I, “as it 
was when we learned our letters® and felt that we 
knew them sufficiently only when the separate 
letters did not elude us, appearing as few elements 
in all the combinations that convey them, and when 
we did not disregard them in small things or great @ 
and think it unnecessary to recognize them, but 
were eager to distinguish them everywhere, in the 
belief that we should never be literate and letter- 
perfect till we could do this.” “True.” “ And is 

. illustrate the acquisition of knowledge (Theaetet. 206 a), the 
relation of elements to compounds, the principles of classifi- 
cation {Phileb. 18 c, Cratyl. 393 p), and the theory of ideas 
(Polit. 278 a. Cf. Isoc. xiii. 13, Xen. Mem. iv. 4. 7, Blass, 
Attische Beredsamkeit, ii. pp. 23 f., 348 f., Cie. De or. ii. 130). 

# Tt is fundamental Platonic doctrine that truth is not 
concerned with size or seeming importance. (Cf. Parmen. 
130 p-z, Polit, 266 v, Laws 793 c, 901-902, Sophist 227 x, 
Hipp. Major 288 pv. 



ypapdtwr, el mov ev vdaow 7 ev KaTomTpoLS 
eudaivowro, o0 mpdTepov yvwoopueba, mplv av 
adra yrapev, GAN eorr tis adtis téxvns TE Kat 
peAérns; Uavrdzac pev obv. *Ap’ odv, 6 Aéyw, 
mpos Yedv, otws odd ovorkol mpdTepov eoopeba, 
C ovre abrot ovre ots dapev Huiv madevréov elvar 
tovs pvAakas, mp av Ta THs awhpootvyns €idy 
kai avdpeias Kal édAevfepidtntos Kai peyado- 
mpeTelas Kal Goa ToUTwy adeAda Kal Ta TOUTWY ad 
evavtia TavTaxod trepipepopeva yvwpilwnev Kat 
evovta ev ois eveotw aicbavdpeba Kai abtra Kal 
eixovas abT@v, Kal pre év opuKpots pyre ev 
peydAos arysdlwpev, aAdka tis adbtis olwpeba 
téxvns elvac Kat pedéryns; IloAA} avaynn, édy. 
D Odxodv, jv 8 ey, Grou av Evuminty & TE TH 
yuxyn Kara 7On evdvTa Kal ev 7TH cider opo- 
oyobvra exeivois Kal Evudwvodvta, Tob avrod 
petéxovta TUmov, TodrT’ av «in KdAoTOv Odapa 

* It is of course possible to contrast images with the 
things themselves, and to speak of forms or species without 
explicit allusion to the metaphysical doctrine of ideas. But 
on the other hand there is not the slightest reason to assume 
that the doctrine and its terminology were not familiar to 
Plato at the time when this part of the Republic was written. 
Cf. Unity of Plato’s Thought, pp. 31 ff., 35. Statisties of 
the uses of eiSos and iééa (Peiper’s Ontologiea Platonica, Taylor, 
Varia Socratica, Wilamowitz, Platon, ii. pp. 249-253), what- 
ever their philological interest, contribute nothing to the in- 
terpretation of Plato’s thought. Cf. my De Platonis Idearum 
Doctrina, pp. 1, 30, and Class. Phil. vol. vi. pp. 363-364. 

There is for common sense no contradiction or problem 
in the fact that Plato here says that we cannot be true 
“ musicians "’ till we recognize both the forms and all copies 
of, or approximations to, them in art or nature, while in 
Book X. (601) he argues that the ee and artist copy not 
the idea but its copy in the material world. 


<<" ~~ 


it not also true that if there are any likenesses? of 
letters reflected in water or mirrors, we shall never 
know them until we know the originals, but such 
knowledge belongs to the same art and discipline ® ?” 
“ By all means.” “Then, by heaven, am I not 
right in saying that by the same token we shall 
never be true musicians, either—neither we nor the 
guardians that we have undertaken to educate— 
until we are able to recognize the forms of soberness, 
courage, liberality,“and high-mindedness and all their 
kindred and their opposites, too, in all the combina- 
tions that contain and convey them, and to apprehend 
them and their images wherever found, disregarding 
them neither in trifles nor in great things, but believ- 
ing the knowledge of them to belong to the same 
art and discipline?” ‘‘ The conclusion is inevitable,” 
he said. “Then,” said I, “ when there is a coin- 
eidence? of a beautiful disposition in the soul and cor- 
responding and harmonious beauties of the same type 
in the bodily form—is not this the fairest spectacle 
for one who is capable of its contemplation ¢?” 

» Plato, like all intellectuals, habitually assumes that 
knowledge of principles helps practice. Cf. Phaedr. 259 ¥, 
262 B, and infra 484 p, 520 c, 540 a. 

* Liberality and high-mindedness, or rather, perhaps, 
magnificence, are among the virtues defined in Aristotle’s 
list (Eth. Nic. 1107 b 17), but are not among the four 

inal virtues which the Republic will use in Book IV. 
in the comparison of the individual with the state. 

. ie: 209 B 7d cuvaudérepov, 210 c, Wilamowitz, vol. ii. 
p. 192. 

* Music and beauty lead to the philosophy of love, more 
fully set forth in the Phaedrus and Symposium, and here 
dismissed in a page. Plato’s practical conclusion here may 
be summed up in the Virgilian line (Aen. v. 344): 

Gratior et pulchro veniens in corpore virtus. 





~ / ~ 4, \ \ ‘ 
7@ Suvapevep Gedcbar; IloAd Yes Kai pea 76 ye 
, ~ ~ 
KdAAoTov épacuuwtatov. Ids 8 od; Taéy 87 6 
Tt pddvora TowtTwv avOpurwy 6 ye povaiKos 
> 4 a» > A > , w > nn“ > , > 
epwn av: ef dé a€vudwvos ein, od« av eparn. OvdK 
»” ” / ” \ \ \ > 7 > / 
av, el ye TL, Efn, KaTa TIHV WuxHY eAAEizoL Et [LEV- 
TOL TL KaTa TO G@pa, Uropetverey av wor eehew 
> 49 / > > > 4 a ” ” 
aonalecbar. Mavédvw, jv 8 éyw, ote EoTe Got 7 
vyeyove TOLOLKG. Towadra, Kal ovyywp@* adAa 76d 
fuou etre owdpootyyn Kal 7dovA dmepBaMovoy & €oTt 
Tes Kowevia.; Kai 7s, eon,  yE exdpova Trovet 
ovx Arrov 7) Adm; *AAAa TH GAAn aperH; Odda- 
~ / / a \ > gf / 
p@s. Ti 8¢; bBpe re wat dxodacia; Idvrwv 
one / , ‘ > / ” > 
pudrvora. Metlw dé twa Kai d€urépay exets €t- 
a ¢ \ ~ ‘ \ > , > v 
meiv Hdoviy THs mEept TA adpodicva; OvdK exw, 
> v > / 'd c ‘A > \ ” 
5’ ds, obd€ ye pavkwrépav. “O dé dplds Epws 
~ A 
méduxe Koopiov Te Kal Kado owdpdvws TE Kal 
poovoikds epav; Kat pada, 7 8 ds. Ovddev apa 
mpoco.otéov javikov ovde Evyyeves akoAacias TH 
A / 
6pIG Epwri; Ob mpocotatéov. Od mpocororeov 
»” 4 e ¢€ 7, > \ / 7 A > ~ 
dpa arn 7 7d0v7y, ovde KoWwrynTéov adTis EpacTH 
Te Kal TratduKots OpO@s ep@oi te Kal epwpevots; 
? / A n ” > 4 / 
Od pévtor, eat AC, én, ® LaKpares, TpogowwTEov. 
Oitw 5H, ws ore, vopobernaes € ev Th oixilopevy 
m7OXet direiv prev Kat Cuveivar Kal antecbar Bomep 
vigos maidikav epactyv, TOv KadA@v xdpw, éav 
/ ‘ > ¥ 4 ec ~ \ a 
melOn* ta 8 GAda ovTws optrciv mpos ov Tis 
5 , ° / / / 4, 
orovodlor, Omws pndémote Sd€er paxpdtepa Tov- 

¢ Extravagant pleasure is akin to madness, Cf. Phileb. 
47 a-c, Phaedo 83 c-p. 
> Cf. 468 B-c. 



“ Far the fairest.” ‘‘ And surely the fairest is the 
most lovable.” ‘‘ Of course.” ‘‘ The true musician, 
then, would love by preference persons of this sort ; 
but if there were disharmony he would not love 
this.” ‘‘ No,” he said, “ not if there was a defect 
in the soul; but if it were in the body he would bear 
with it and still be willing to bestow his love.” 
“T understand,” I said, ‘‘ that you have or have had 
favourites of this sort and I grant your distinction. 
But tell me this—can there be any communion 
between soberness and extravagant pleasure??” 
“How could there be,” he said, “since such 
pleasure puts a man beside himself no less than 
pain?” “Or between it and virtue generally?” 
“ By no means.” “ But is there between pleasure 
and insolence and licence?’’ “ Most assuredly.” 
“Do you know of greater or keener pleasure than 

. that associated with Aphrodite?” “I don’t,” he 

said, “nor yet of any more insane.’ “ But is not 
the right love a sober and harmonious love of the 
orderly and the beautiful?” “It is indeed,” said 
he. “Then nothing of madness, nothing akin to 
licence, must be allowed to come nigh the right 
love?” “No.” “ Then this kind of pleasure may 
not come nigh, nor may lover and beloved who rightly 
love and are loved have anything to do with it?” 
“No, by heaven, Socrates,” he said, “it must not 
come nigh them.” “Thus, then, as it seems, you 
will lay down the law in the city that we are founding, 
that the lover may kiss ® and pass the time with and 
touch the beloved as a father would a son, for honour- 
able ends, if he persuade him. But otherwise he must 
so associate with the objects of his care that there 
should never be any suspicion of anything further, 



Crov EvyyiyvesBa: «i 5¢ un, poyov dmovaias Kat 
ameipoxadias bheEovra. Odrtws, ébn. “Ap odr, 
nv & eyw, Kat cot datverar rédos tiv eyew 6 
TEpi jrovaiks Adyos: of yodv Set TeAcuTav, TETE- 
Acdrnke: Sei 5é mov redevTav 7a povauKd eis TO 
Tod KaAod epwrikd. Eyppnp, 9 8 Os. 

XIII. Mera 57 povouKiy YUpVaoTLK Opemréot ot 
veaviat. Ti pv; Act pev 8) Kat radrn dcpiBas 

D tpegeobau €k Tralowy dia Biov, EXE dé TOS, as 
eyapuar, dde° axomet 5€ Kal av: épol pev yap ob 
paiverat, 6 6 av xpnorov i] o@pa, TovTo TH adToo 
apeTh pox dyalny moveiv, GAAG Tobvavriov Yuyx7) 
ayab) TH adrijs dperh oda Tapéxew ws oldv TE 
BeArvarov go. de mas paiveTar; Kai uot, edn, 
ovtws. Odxody ef TP dudvovav ixav@s Oeparev- 
cares mrapadoipev adr hp Ta. rept TO o@pa aKpiBo- 

E Aoyetobat, Tpets 5€ daov Tods TUmous ddyynoai- 
pcOa, iva pt) paxpordoy@pev, 6pbds av mrovoipev; 
Ildvu pev odv. MéOns pév 87 «tmopev ote adex- 
Téov avrois: mavti yap mov paddrov eyxwpet 7 
dvrAakt pebvobévr. pr) cidévac Gmov ys eariv. 
Tedoiov yap, 4 8 ds, tov ye PvAaxa gvAakos 
Seiobar. Ti dé 8) citwv mépi; abAnrai pev yap 

* The dependence of body on soul, whether in a mystical, 
a moral, or a medical sense, is a favourite doctrine of Plato 
and Platonists. Cf. Charm. 156-157, Spenser, ** An Hymn 
in Honour of Beauty”: 

For of the soul the body form doth take, 
For soul is form, and doth the body make, 

and Shelley, ‘* The Sensitive Plant”: 


i = 

on penalty of being stigmatized for want of taste 
and true musical culture.” ‘‘ Even so,” he said. 
“ Do you not agree, then, that our discourse on music 
has come to an end? It has certainly made a fitting 
end, for surely the end and consummation of culture 
is the love of the beautiful.” “I concur,” he said. 

XIII. “ After music our youth are to be educated 
by gymnastics?” “Certainly.” “In this too they 
must be carefully trained from boyhood through life, 
and the way of it is this, I believe ; but consider it 
yourself too. For I, for my part, do not believe that 
a sound body by its excellence makes the soul good, 
but on the contrary that a good soul by its virtue 
renders the body the best that is possible. What is 
your opinion?” “TI think so too.” “ Then if we 
should sufficiently train the mind and turn over to it 
the minutiae of the care of the body, and content 
ourselves with merely indicating the norms or 
patterns, not to make a long story of it, we should 
be acting rightly?” “ By all means.” “ From in- 
toxication ® we said that they must abstain. For a 
guardian is surely the last person in the world to 
whom it is allowable to get drunk and not know 
where on earth he is.” “ Yes,” he said, “‘ it would 
be absurd that a guardian’ should need a guard.” 
“What next about their food? These men are 

A lady, the wonder.of her kind, 
Whose form was upborne by a lovely mind, 
Which dilating had moulded her mien and motion 
Like a sea-flower unfolded beneath the ocean. 
Cf. also Democr. fr. B. 187 Diels*. 
> Cf. 398 x. There is no contradiction between this and 
the half-serious proposal of the Laws to use supervised 
drinking-bouts as a safe test of character (Laws 641). 
* ye emphasizes what follows from the very meaning of 
the word. Cf. 379 s, 389 B, 435 a. 




of dvdpes Tob peylorou dy@vos: 7 odxE; Nai. 
“Ap” obv ” Tove THY aoKynTav etus TpoonjKova 
dv ein TOUTOLS ; "lows. "AM, iy S° eye, bavebdys 
airy yé Tis Kal opadepa 7™pos bytevav’ 7 odx opas 
OTe Kabevdovot Te Tov Biov, Kal éav opuKpd exBa@at 
THs _TeTaypevns _Suairys, peydha Kat opddpa 
vooodow ovdToL ot doxyrat; “Opd. Kopiborépas 
57 twos, Hv 8° eyo, doKjoews det Tots 7roAEpLKots 
abAnrais, ous ye a@orep KUvas dypumvous TE 
dvdyKn elvaw Kal 6 TL pddvora ov opav kal 
akovew Kal moAAds petaBodas év tats oTparetais 
B petaBdAdovras dddruv TE kal t&v add\Awy oitwv 
kal etAjoecov Kal YEyLOVveY [1) dxpoopareis elvau 
m™pos bylevay. Daiverai jHoL. SAP: obv 7 Bedriorn 
yopvacrurn adeAdy tis av ein THs povotkhs, Av 
oAtyov mpoTepov Sufjwev 5 Ids déyets; ‘Ahi TOV 
ral ETTLELKNS ‘YULVAOTLKH, Kal peddvora 7 TOV mrept 
TOV moepLov. Ih 57); Kat map “Opjpov, W | oe 
eye, Td ve Towabra pdbor dv THs. oloba yap ort 
emi oTparelas ev tats Tov Tpaov éorudceow ore 
ixOvow avTovs €ored, kal Tata é7mt Dadarry ev 
‘EAAnorovTw ovras, ovte édbois Kpéacw adda 

* Of. 543 B, 621 p, Laches 182 a, Laws 830 a, Demosth. 
xxv. 97 dOAnral Tov Kadhov Epywv. 

> Cf. ’Epdorat 132 c xabevdwy rdvra tov Biov. XKenophanes, 
Euripides, Aristotle, and the medical writers, like Plato, 
protest against the exaggerated honour paid to athletes 
and the heavy sluggishness induced by overfeeding and 

¢ Laws 797 pv. Cf. supra 380 5. Aristotle’s comment on 
peraBorh, Hth. Nic. 1154 b 28 ff., is curiously reminiscent of 
Plato, including the phrase dw\j odd" émceinys. 

@ Perhaps in the context ** cold.” 

* Literally “equitable,” if we translate émvecxyjs by its later 
meaning, that is, not over-precise or rigid in conformity to 




athletes in the greatest of contests,? are they not?” 
“Yes.” “Is, then, the bodily habit of the athletes 
we see about us suitable for such?” ‘‘ Perhaps.” 
“Nay, said I, “that is a drowsy habit and pre- 
carious for health. Don’t you observe that they 
sleep away their lives,” and that if they depart ever 
so little from their prescribed regimen these athletes 
are liable to great and violent diseases?” “I do.” 
“ Then,” said I, ““ we need some more ingenious form 
of training for our athletes of war, since these must 
be as it were sleepless hounds, and have the keenest 
possible perceptions of sight and hearing, and in 
their campaigns undergo many changes° in their 
water, their food, and in exposure to the 
heat of the sun and to storms,? without disturbance 
of their health.” ‘I think so.” “‘ Would not, then, 
the best gymnastics be akin to the music that we 
were just now describing?” “What do youmean?” 
“It would be a simple and flexible ¢ gymnastic, and 
ially so in the training for war.” “In what 
way?” “One could learn that,” said I, “ even from 
Homer!’ For you are aware that in the banqueting 
of the heroes on campaign he does not feast them on 
fish,? though they are at the sea-side on the Helles- 
pont,” nor on boiled meat, but only on roast, which is 
rule. Adam is mistaken in saying that érecxys is practically 
synonymous with dya@%. It sometimes is, but not here. 
Cf. Plutarch, De san. 13 dxpeBns . . . Kal de’ dvuxos. 

¥ So Laws 706 p. The cai is perhaps merely idiomatic in 

* Homer’s ignoring of fish diet, except in stress of starva- 
tion, has been much and idly discussed both in antiquity 
and by modern scholars. apg udo-science has even 
opty from this passage that Plato placed a “taboo” 

* Which Homer calls “ fish-teeming,” JI. ix. 360. 



/ > A a“ \ / > “ w cA 
pdvov Omrois, a. x) pador” dy ely otpariirass 
etrropa mavraxob yap, os eros eineiv, atT@ TO 
mupt xpyabar evrropuiTepov ] ayyeta Evprepubépew. 
Kai pda. Odvde perv 7ovoparav, ws, 
“Opmpos TUwTOTE env o8n: 7) TOOTO pev Kat of GAAot 
doknTai toaow, ore TO peMovre owpate ed e€ew 
adbextéov THv TowovtTwyv amdvtrwy; Kai dpbds ye, 
eon, loaci te Kal améexovTat. Lupakxootay d¢, @ 

/ / \ A / v ¢ 
pire, tpamelav Kai LiKeAcKyv mrouxiAiay dyov, ws 
€otkas, ovK aivets, elmep cou tadta SoKet dplds 
” A ~ / + \ / 
exew. OU por doxd. Veyers dpa Kat Kopwiav 

/ / > > / / s A 
Kopnv didnv elvar avdpdor péAdovow ed oajsatos 
id / \ oN > ~ \ > ~ 
e€ew. Ilavrdmact pev odv. Odxodv cal “Artix@v 
TEeLpaTwr Tas SoKovoas elvar edrrabeias; “AvayKn. 
“OdAnv ydp, olua, tiv Towatrnv oitnow Kat 
/ ~ , \ 2A a 3 ~ 
Siarav TH pweAoToula Te Kal WOH TH ev TH Tavap- 

, eo eae € a , > , 
E Povlw KQAL EV 7TAO0L pvOpots TTETIOLY) LEVY) amreukalov- 


> ~ vn > / ~ \ La > ~ 
Tes opOds av amekdlomev. I1ds yap ov; Odxodv 
exel prev akoAaciav 7 TroukiAla evérixtev, evtadla 
de vocov, 7 Sé amAdtys KaTad pev pLovoiKny 
ev wuyats owdpootyvnv, Kata 8€ yupvaoTiKny 
>? 7 e / > 7, ” > 
ev owpaow byieav; ~AAnbéorata, bn. *Axoda- 

* \ A / A > / b ee J > 
aias de Kal voowv mAnfvovody év mode dp’ od 
duxaorTipid Te Kal latpeta moAAa avolyerar, Kal 
duxaviky Te Kal latpiKn ceuvivovTa, dTav O17) Kal 
> vj ‘ \ / ‘ > A / 
eAcvepot troAAoi Kat odddpa epi adra omovdd- 
Cwow; Ti yap od perder; 

* Cf. Green, History of English People, Book I1. chap. ii., 
an old description of the Scotch army: “ They have therefore 
no occasion for pots or pans, for they dress the flesh of the 
cattle in their skins after they have flayed them,” ete. But 
ef. Athenaeus, i. 8-9 (vol. i. p. 36 L.C.L.), Diog. Laert. viii. 

13 wore evropicrous avrots elvat Tas Tpodds. 



what soldiers could most easily procure. For every- 
where, one may say, it is of easier provision to use 
the bare fire than to convey pots and pans? along.” 
“ Indeed it is.’ “‘ Neither, as I believe, does Homer 
ever make mention of sweetmeats. Is not that 
something which all men in training understand—that 
if one is to keep his body in good condition he must 
abstain from such things altogether?” “ They are 
_ right,” he said, “ in that they know it and do abstain.” 
“Then, my friend, if you think this is the right way, 
you apparently do not approve of a Syracusan table ° 
and Sicilian variety of made dishes.” ‘“‘ I think not.” 
** You would frown, then, on a little Corinthian maid 
as the chére amie of men who were to keep themselves 
fit?’ “ Most certainly.” “ And also on the seem- 
ing delights of Attic pastry ?’’ ‘‘ Inevitably.” “In 
general, I take it, if we likened that kind of food and 
regimen to music and song expressed in the pan- 
harmonic mode and in every variety of rhythm it 
would be a fair comparison.” ‘‘ Quite so.” “‘ And 
there variety engendered licentiousness, didit not, but 
heredisease? Whilesimplicity in music begets sobriety 
in the souls, and in gymnastic training it begets 
health in bodies.” ‘‘ Most true,” he said. “ And 
when licentiousness and disease multiply in a city, 
are not many courts of law and dispensaries opened, 
and the arts of chicane ¢ and medicine give themselves 
airs when even free men in great numbers take them 
very seriously ?”’ “ How can they helpit?” he said. 

> Proverbial, like the ** Corinthian maid” and the “ Attic 

et Cf. Otto, Sprichw. d. Rim. p. 321, Newman, 
ntroduction to Aristotle’s Politics, p.302. Cf. also Phaedr. 
240 B. 

© dixavckj: more contemptuous than dicacrixy. 



XIV. Tis be Kakhs Te Kal aicypas mauSetas ev 
mohe dpa a Tt jeetlov e€eus AaBetv TEK [LT pLov, 7 
70 detoba iatpadv Kal ducaorav aKkpwv, pa peovov 
Tovs patdous TE Kal XElporexvas, dAAd Kal Tods év 
erevbepyp oXnLare TI pOOTroLoUjLevous reOpadbar ; 7 

B ovK atoxpov doKet Kat dmraevotas péya TEKE- 
plov TO emaxT@ map’ adAAwv, ws SeaToT@v Te Kal 
Kpit@v, TO. dixaiw avayxdlecOar yphobar, Kat 
amopia oiketwv; Ldvrwv pév ody, edn, atoxiotov. 
°H Soxet cor, Hv 8 éyw, Tovrov aicywov elvar 
TooTO, OTav Tis 1) povov TO todd tod Biov ev 
Suxcacrnpiors pevyeov Te Kal Suey KararpiBnrar, 
dAAa Kal do dmetpoxadias én aire 57 Tourw 
neva KadAwrilecbar, ws Sewos wv TEpt TO 

C ddukeiv Kal ixavds maoas ev atpodas otpedecbat, 
maoas dé deEdSous SieEeAP av atroorpadjvas Avyilo- 
flevos, woTe pq) Tapacyeivy Siknv, Kal tabra 
opikp@v te Kal oddevos aiwy evexa, ayvodv dow 
KdAMov Kal ayewov TO mapacKkevdlew tov Biov 
ait@ pndev Seicbar vvaralovtos dixactod; OvK, 
adva totr, édn, exeivov ett atoyiov. To de 
iatpikis, hv 8 eyw, Setcbar, 6 Tu pa) Tpavpdtov 
Ld ” > / / / 
evexa 7} Twwv éemeTeiwy voonudtwv emimecovTwr, 

D dda 8’ dpyiav te Kai Siartay otav diunAPopev 
pevpdtwv te Kal mvevudtwr womep Aiwvas ep- 

* I have given the sense. The construction is debated 
accordingly as we read dmopla or amopig. Of. Phaedr. 239 v, 
of the use of cosmetics, x7re olxelwv. The xai with dopla 
is awkward or expresses the carelessness of conversation. 

> Plato likes to emphasize by pointing to a lower depth or 
a higher height beyond the superlative. 

¢ There is no exact English equivalent for dze:poxaXia, the 



XIV. “ Will you be able to find a surer proof of an 
evil and shameful state of education in a city than the 
necessity of first-rate physicians and judges, not only 
for the base and mechanical, but for those who claim 
to have been bred in the fashion of free men? Do 
you not think it disgraceful and a notable mark of 
bad breeding to have to make use of a justice im- 
ported from others, who thus become your masters 
and judges, from lack of such qualities in yourself *?”’ 
“ The most shameful thing in the world.” “Is it?” 
said I, “ or is this still more shameful ’—when a man 
not only wears out the better part of his days in the 
courts of law as defendant or accuser, but from the 
lack of all true sense of values ¢ is led to plume himself 
on this very thing, as being a smart fellow to ‘ put 
over ’ an unjust act and cunningly to try every dodge 
and practice,* every evasion, and wriggle® out of every 
hold in defeating justice, and that too for trifles and 
worthless things, because he does not know how much 
nobler and better it is to arrange his life so as to 
have no need? of a nodding juryman?” “That is,” 
said he, “ still more shameful than the other.” “‘ And 
to require medicine,” said I, “ not merely for wounds 
or the incidence of some seasonal maladies, but, 
because of sloth and such a regimen as we described, 
to fill one’s body up with winds and humours like a 
insensitiveness to the xaév of the banausic, the nouveau riche 
ant Th now f thi 1} f Arist 

ie rasing 0 1s risto- 
phanes’ ‘Clouds and ghe: description ‘Of the. pettifogping 
lawyer and politician in the Theaetetus 172 ©. Cf. infra 
519, also Euthydem. 302 8, and Porphyry, De abstinentia, 
i, 34. The metaphors are partly from wrestling. 

* Cf. Blaydes on Aristoph. Knights 263. 

? Cf. Gorg. 507 pv, Thucyd. iii. 82, Isoc. Antid. 238, 
Antiphanes, fr. 288 Kock 6 undév décxav obdevds Seirac vopov. 



mum aévous dvcas Te Kal Kardppous voonpacw 
ovopwaTa riBeobau dvayndlew Tovs Kopibods *A- 
oxAnmuddas, ovK aioxpov Soxet; | Kai pad’, en, 
as aAnPds Kava tabra Kal arora. voonpdrwy 
ovopara. Oia, iv S ey, ws otpat, ovK a en 
“AakAnmod: TEKLLALpopat bé, Ort avrod ot ulets 
Ee Tpola EdpumtAw tetpwyevw én’ oivov II 
pevecov aAduita moAda éemimacbévta Kal Tupov éezt- 
406 €vobévra, & 87 Soxet preyparedy elvat, ovK 
epepipavro TH doven meiv, ovde Harpocrw ™@ 
lopevyy emeTipnoay. Kai pev om, eon, aromov ye 
TO 7p ouTws EXOVTL. Ovr, et y evvoeis, elrov, 
ort Th Tadayuryuch TOV voonparov Tavry Th viv 
iarpukh 7™po tod *AokAnmddar odK exp@vTo, ws 
aot, mpiv ‘Hpddiuccov yevécbar: ‘Hpddiucos Se 
maudorpiBns av Kal voowdns YEVvopLevos, peas 
B yupvaorixny larpuch, dméxvaroe mp@rov pev Kal 
pddwora éavrov, emer’ dAous dorepov moAAovs. 
11h 89; ey. Maxpov, jv 8 ey, TOV Odvarov 
adT@ Toujoas. mapaKxohovbayv yap TO voonpart 
Bavacipc OvTL oUTE idoacbax, ola, olds T Hv 
€auTov, ev doxorig TE madvroov latpevopevos dud 
Biov &ln amoxvaiopevos, el Tu THS elwOvias dvaiTyns 

* Plato ridicules the unsavoury metaphors required to 
describe the effects of auto-intoxication. There is a similar 
bit of somewhat heavier satire in Spencer’s Social Statics, 
1868, p. 32: “Carbuncled noses, cadaverous faces, foetid 
breaths, and plethoric bodies meet us at every turn; 
and our condolences are perpetually asked for headaches, 
flatulences, nightmare, heartburn, and endless other dyspeptic 
symptoms.” ! 

® Plato is probably quoting from memory. In our text, — 
Tl, xi. 624, Hecamede gives the draught to Machaon and ; 
Nestor as the Jon (538 B) correctly states. / 
272 : 


marsh and compel the ingenious sons of Aesculapius 
to invent for diseases such names as fluxes and 
flatulences—don’t you think that disgraceful ?*” 
“Those surely are,” he said, “new-fangled and 
monstrous strange names of diseases.” “There was 
nothing of the kind, I fancy,” said I, “in the days 
of Aesculapius. I infer this from the fact that at 
Troy his sons did not find fault with the damsel who 
gave to the wounded Eurypylus? to drink a posset of 
Pramnian wine plentifully sprinkled with barley and 
gratings of cheese, inflammatory ingredients of a 
surety, nor did they censure Patroclus, who was in 
charge of the case.” ‘“ It was indeed,” said he, “a 
strange potion for a man in that condition.” “ Not 
so strange,” said I, “if you reflect that the former 
Asclepiads made no use of our modern coddling ¢ 
medication of diseases before the time of Herodicus. 
But Herodicus? was a trainer and became a vale- 
tudinarian, and blended gymnastics and medicine. 
for the torment first and chiefly of himself and then 
of many successors.’ ‘““How so?” he said. “ By 
lingering out his death,” said I; “for living in 
perpetual observance of his malady, which was in- 
curable, he was not able to effect a cure, but lived 
through his days unfit for the business of life, suffering 
the tortures of the damned if he departed a whit 

* This coddling treatment of disease, which Plato affects 
to reprobate here, he recommends from the point of view 
of science in the Timaeus (89 c): 6d ra:daywyetv det diairats, 
ete. Cf. Eurip. Orestes 883; and even in the Republic 
459 c. 

4 Cf. Protag. 316 ©, Phaedr. 227 p. To be distinguished 
from his namesake, the brother of Gorgias in Gorg. 448 B. 
Cf. Cope on Aristot. Rhet. i. 5, Wilamowitz-Kiessling, Phil. 
Unt. xv. p. 220, Jiithner, Philostratus aber Gymnastik, p. 10. 

VOL. I T 273 


exBain, Svo0avardv 8€ td aodias ets yhpas 
agixero. Kaddv dpa 76 yépas, ébn, Ths Téxvns 

C hvéynato. Ofov eixds, Fv 8° eyed, tov ph €iddra, 
ort ’AokAnmios odk ayvoia obS€é dmetpia TovTou 
Tob eidous THs latpiKhs tots éxydvois od KaT- 
éderEev atdtd, addr cidas Ste mao Tots evVOMou- 
Lévols Epyov tu éxdotw ev TH WéAe TpooTéeraKTat, 
0 dvayxatov épydlecba, Kai oddevi cyodr dia 
Biov Kdpvew latpevopevm: 6 tyets yedotws ert 
ev t&v Snurovpydv aicbavoueba, emi Sé trav 
TrAovaiwy te Kal eddayidvewv Soxodvtwy elvat odK 
aicbavopneba. lds; én. 

D XV. Terra pev, ay S° eyo, Kapa agvot 
mapa Tod iatpod ddpyaxov muy efeuecar TO 
voonua 7} KatTw Kabapbeis 7) Kavoe 7) TOMA XpNnod- 
peevos amnAAdyOau: eav dé Tis adtT@ waxpav Siavrav 
mpooTatTn, mAidud Te Tept THY Kehadny mepiTiBeis 
kal Ta ToUTOLs Eopueva, TAXD elev STL OV GxOAr) 
kdpvew ovd€ Avoitedct odtTw Civ, voojpart Tov 

2 Cf. Macaulay on Mitford’s History of Greece: “It 
(oligarchical government) has a sort of valetudinarian long- 
evity; it lives in the balance of Sanctorius; it takes no 
exercise ; it exposes itself to no accident; it is seized with a 
hypochondriac alarm at every new sensation; it trembles at 
every breath; it lets blood for every inflammation; and 
thus, without ever enjoying a day of health or pleasure, drags 
out its existence to a doting and debilitated old age.”’ That 
Macaulay here is consciously paraphrasing Plato is apparent 
from his unfair use of the Platonic passage in his essay on 
Bacon. Cf. further Eurip. Supp. 1109-1113; Seneca on 
early medicine, Epistles xv. 3 (95) 14 ff., overdoes both 
Spencer and Macaulay. Cf. Rousseau, Emile, Book I.: 
**Je ne sais point apprendre 4 vivre 4 qui ne songe qu’a 



from his fixed regimen, and struggling against death 
by reason of his science he won the prize of a doting 
oldage.*” “A noble prize” indeed for his science,” 
he said. “ The appropriate one,” said I, “ for a man 
who did not know that it was not from ignorance or 
inacquaintance with this type of medicine that 
Aesculapius did not discover it to his descendants, 
but because he knew that for all well-governed 
peoples there is a work assigned to each man in the 
city which he must perform, and no one has leisure 
to be sick * and doctor himself all his days. And this 
we absurdly enough perceive in the case of a crafts- 
man, but don’t see in the case of the rich and so-called 
fortunate.” ‘‘ How so?” he said. 

XV. “A carpenter,” said I, “ when he is sick 
expects his physician to give him a drug which will 
operate as an emetic on the disease, or to get rid of it 
by purging @ or the use of cautery or the knife. Butif 
anyone prescribes for him a long course of treatment 
with swathings * about the head and their accompani- 
ments, he hastily says that he has no leisure to be 
sick, and that such a life of preoccupation with his 

s’empécher de mourir;* La Rochefoucauld (Maz. 282): 
“ C’est une ennuyeuse maladie que de conserver sa santé par 
un trop grand régime.” 

: pun yypas and yépas is hardly translatable. Cf. 
_Pherecydes apud Diog. Laert. i. 119 y@oviy 5¢ bvoua éyévero 
TH, éradyn aitZ Zas yay yépas dot (vol. i. p. 124 L.C.L.). 
he ay ae use of xaér ef. Eurip. Cyclops 551, Sappho, 

= 58). 

© Cf. Plutarch, De sanitate tuenda 23, Sophocles, fr. 
88. 11 (?), Lucian, Nigrinus 22, differently ; Hotspur’s, 
““Zounds! how has he the leisure to be sick?’ 

@ For 4 xdrw cf. Chaucer, “‘Ne upward purgative ne 
downward laxative.” 

- © Cf. Blaydes on Aristoph. Acharnians 439. 



voov Tpoo€xovra, Tijs de TpokeyLevns €pyaotas 
dpedobvra. Kal pera Tatra yxalpew <imwv TO 
TovovTe) latp@, «ts THY etwOvtav Siavrav euBas, 
dyes yevdpevos CH Ta éavtod mpdtrwv: ay dé p27) 
icavov TO o@pa drreveykely, TedeuTHoas mpay- 
paTov dandy. Kai T® TowvTw pev y’, eon, 
doxet “mpemew ovTws laTpikh _xphoba, *Ap’, ig 
407 § eva, dre Fv Te adt@ Epyov, 6 ef pi) mparror, ovdK 
eAvavreher Cav; Aijrov, ey). ‘O de 57) movovos, 
as dapev, ovdeyv exer ToLodTov Epyov mpoKetpevoy, 
od avayralopevy dmexecbar dBiarov. Odxovr 57) 
Adyerat ye. DwxvrA(idov yap, hv 8 Gye ovK 
dxovets, m&s dynol Seiv, dtav tw 75 7 Bios qs 
apeTnv doxely. Ofwae dé ve édn, Kal 7poTepov. 
M ndev, elroy, Tept Tovrou att@ paxywpeba, ard 
pas avrovs dddswpev, mOTEpov pederyTéov TOTO 
Bz@ mAovoiw Kat aBicorov TO pe) pedeT@vtt, 7 
vocorpodia TEKTOVUKT) per Kal rats aAraus Téxvats 
€umoowov TH mpooeter Tod vot, TO de DuxvAidov 
TmapaxeAcvpa ovoev eurrodiler. Nai pa tov Ata, 
47 o és, axyedov ye Tt mavToV pddvora n ye 
TeparTepw YULVAOTURAS u) TEpLTTI), atrn em 
péheva Tob owparos: Ka yap Tpos otkovopiias Kat 
mpos oTpateias Kal mpos édpaious ev moet dpxas 
Svaxodros. To dé 81) péyiorov, OTe Kal mpos 

@ This alone marks the humour of the whole passage. 
which Macaulay’s Hssay on Bacon seems to miss. Cf 
Aristoph, Acharnians 757; Apology 41 v. 

> The line of Phocylides is toyed with merely to vary the 
expression of the thought. Bergk restores it di no Bas Buornp, 
dperiv 5’ rav 7 Bios 4#6n, which is Horace’s (Ep. i. 1. 53 f.): 

Quaerenda pecunia primum est; 
Virtus post nummos! 



illness and neglect of the work that lies before him 
isn’t worth living. And thereupon he bids fare- 
well to that kind of physician, enters upon his 
customary way of life, regains his health, and lives 
attending to his affairs—or, if his body is not equal to 
the strain, he dies and is freed from all his troubles.? ”’ 
*“ For such a man,”’ he said, “ that appears to be the 
right use of medicine.” ‘‘ And is not the reason,” I 
said, “‘ that he had a task and that life wasn’t worth 
acceptance on condition of not doing his work?” 
“Obviously,” he said. “‘ But the rich man, we say, 
has no such appointed task, the necessity of abstaining 
from which renders life intolerable.” “I haven’t 
heard of any.” “Why, haven’t you heard that 
saying of Phocylides,’ that after a man has ‘ made his 
pile’ he ought to practise virtue?” “ Before, too, 
I fancy,’ he said. ‘“ Let us not quarrel with him on 
that point,” I said, “ but inform ourselves whether 
this virtue is something for the rich man to practise, 
and life is intolerable if he does not, or whether we 
are to suppose that while valetudinarianism is a hind- 
rance to single-minded attention to carpentry and the 
other arts, it is no obstacle to the fulfilment of Pho- 
cylides’ exhortation.”’ ““ Yes, indeed,” he said, “ this 
excessive care for the body that goes beyond simple 
gymnastics® is about the greatest of all obstacles. 
For it is troublesome in household affairs and military 
service and sedentary offices in the city.” “‘And, chief 
of all, it puts difficulties in the way of any kind of 

¢ In the Gorgias (464 B) iarpixy is recognized as co-ordinate 
in the care of the body with yvuvacrixy. Here, whatever 

goes beyond the training and care that will preserve the 
health of a normal body is austerely rejected. by. 410 B. 



pabjoes dorwacoby Kal évvonoes Te Kal ped€eras 
C mpos éavrov yaderj, Kepadjs twas aiel S1a- 
tdaces’ Kal idyyous bromredovoa Kal aitwwpyevn 
ex gidogodias eyyiyvecbar, wate, San TavTn 
dpeT?) aoKxetrat Kat Soxyudlerat, mavTn €f7rddt0s* 
Kdpvew yap olecbar Trove? del Kal Wdivovra pnToTE 
Anyew epi TOD cdpatos. Hikds y’, bn. Ovdxodv 
Tatra yuyvwoKovta douev Kat “AokAnmodv tods 
pev dda te Kal dwairn byvewds eyovtas Ta 
D cwpara, voonua 5é Te amoKexpiywevov taxovras ev 
a \ \ ~ & A 
abdTois, TovTots pev Kal TavTH TH eer KaTadetEar 
latpikyv, papdKows Te Kal Topats Ta voonpara 
exBaAdovta atrov thy elwOviay mpoorarrew 

4, a \ \ A / \ > ww 
Siaitav, tva por) Ta ToduTuKAa BAdmToL, TA 8° elow 
dud TavTos vevoonkdTa owpata ovK émtyetpeiv 
Siairais KaTa opiKpov amavtTAcbvTa Kal émuyéovTa 
pakpov Kat Kakov Biov avOpwmm roreiv, Kat 
éxyova avT@v, Ws TO eikds, ETEpa ToLadTa puTevew, 
> \ \ \ 4 > a ft / / 

E dAAd TOV 47) Suvdevov ev TH kabeornKvig mepody 
Civ pr otecbar deity Ceparrevewv, ws ovTe adT@ ovre 

id ~ / ” , > 

mode. AvowreAH; Ilodutixdv, ey, A€yets “AcKAn- 
, A SIGS ISA g \ ¢ a eee 
mov. Afdrov, jv 8 eyw? Kat ot maides adrod, 

1 §uardoces Galen: diacrdces Mss., plainly wrong. 

2 SHXov, Hv 0 éyd xrX.] this, the s. reading, will not construe 
smoothly, and many emendations have been proposed, none 
of which seriously affects the sense. I have translated 
Schneider’s transposition of drt tovodros jj after éy® and 
before kai. ; 

4 As Macaulay, Essay on “ Bacon,” puts it: ‘* That a vale- 
tudinarian . . . who enjoyed a hearty laugh over the Queen of 
Nayarre’s tales should be treated as a caput lwpinum because 
he could not read the Timaeus without a headache, was a 
notion which the humane spirit of the English schools of 
wisdom altogether rejected.”’ For the thought ¢/. Xen. Mem. 
iii. 12. 6-7. 



instruction, thinking, or private meditation, forever 
imagining headaches* and dizziness and attributing 
their origin to philosophy. So that wherever this 
kind of virtue is practised ° and tested it is in every 
way a hindrance.“ For it makes the man always 
fancy himself sick and never cease from anguishi 

about his body.” “ Naturally,” he said. “‘ Then 
shall we not say that it was because Asclepius knew 
this—that for those who were by nature and course 
of life sound of body but had some localized disease, 
that for such, I say, and for this habit he revealed the 
art of medicine, and, driving out their disease by drugs 
and surgery, prescribed for them their customary 
regimen in order not to interfere with their civic 
duties, but that, when bodies were diseased inwardly 
and throughout, he did not attempt by diet and 
by gradual evacuations and infusions to prolong a 
wretched existence for the man and have him beget 
in all likelihood similar wretched offspring? But if a 
man was incapable of living in the established round 4 
and order of life, he did not think it worth while to 
treat him, since such a fellow is of no use either to 
himself or to the state.” “A most politic Asclepius 
you're telling us of,?” he said. “ Obviously,” said I, 

® Literally “virtue is practised in this way.” Cf. 503 p 
for a similar contrast between mental and other labours. 
And for the meaning of virtue cf. the Elizabethan: “ Virtue 
is ever sowing of her seeds.” 

© There is a suggestion of Stoic terminology in Plato’s 
use of éuréd.0s and similar words. Cf. Xen. Mem.i.2.4. On 
the whole passage cf. again Macaulay's Essay on “‘ Bacon,” 
Maximus of Tyre (Duebn.) 10, and the diatribe on modern 
medicine and valetudinarianism in Edward Carpenter’s 
Civilization, Its Cause and Cure. % Cf. Thucyd. i. 130. 

¢ There is a touch of comedy in the Greek. C/. Eupolis, 
fr. 94 Kock raxdv déyers pév. 



tu a > > ec ~z ¢ 2 , > A 
6Tt Towwdros Hv, ody Opas ws Kati ev Tpoia ayaboi 
408 mpos TOV moe pov epavnoay, kal Th larpur}, ws 
eya Aéyw, EXpOVTO ; 7 od penvyoat, 6tt Kal TO 
Mevérew €x Tod tpavpatos ob} 6 [ldvdapos eBadev 
alu’ éexpvljoavr’ emi 7 yma ddppak’ émacaov, 
° > > ~ ‘\ ~ “” ~ a“ a 2O% 
6 7. 8 éxphv peta TodTO 7H meivy H dhayelv ovdev 
paArov 7) TH EdpurvAw mpocératrov, ws tkava@v 
ovTwy TOV pappacev idoaobae avdpas 7po TOV 
Tpavpdrev dyvewous Te Kal Koopious ev d.airn, 
B kav ef ruxouev ev TH Tapaxphywa Kucediva TUOVTES, 
voowoyn dS¢ diac te Kat axddaoTov ovTe adrtots 
” al »” ” A ~ 299 > \ 
ovte Tois aAAois wovto Avortedciv Civ, odd? emi 
TovTos THVv Téxvynv Seiv elvas, odd€ OepamevTéov 
> , 209 3 , , , 
avtovs, ovd «f Midov zrAovowrepor elev. Ilavu 
/ ” / > ~ cal 
kopibovs, ey, Aéyets "AokAnmod zaidas. 
XVI. péve, jv 8 eyed Kaitor ameWoivrés 
i ¢ 5 , ‘ Il / ry 7A: 5X 
YE Tpiv of tpaywdiorrowi Te Kal Iivdapos *AmdA- 
Awvos péev daow ’AokAnmov civar, tao dé xpvoob 
C mrevoPHvar mAovovov av8pa Davdounov 780 ovra 
idoac8ar, obev 57) Kal  Kepavvnbfjvas avrov. Heets 
d€ KaTa Ta Tpoeipyueva od Trefducba adrois ap- 
, > > > \ Ae > Re 
dotepa, add’ «i pe feot Fv, ovK 7, pnooper, 
aicxpoxepdys, a 5 aiaxpoepors, ovK iy Geod. 
Lrictod re i) 5’ os, tadra an aAAa mept Todde 
i Aéyets, @ UdKpares; dp’ od« ayalods Set 
Mt Th move. KexTHobar iatpovs; «lev 8’ dv mov 

@ Cf. the Homeric 7 ot péury ; 

> Plato is quoting loosely or adapting JI. iv. 218. atw’ 
éxpugjoas ex’ dp’ Hm papwaxa elds rdoce is said of Machaon, 
not of Menelaus. 

¢ Proverbial and suggests Tyrtaeus. Cf. Laws 660 x. 



‘that was his character. And his sons too, don’t 
you see that at Troy they approved themselves 
good fighting-men and practised medicine as I 
described it? Don’t you remember? that in the 
ease of Menelaus too from the wound that Pandarus 

They sucked the blood, and soothing simples sprinkled ?° 
But what he was to eat or drink thereafter they no 
more prescribed than for Eurypylus, taking it for 
granted that the remedies sufficed to heal men who 
before their wounds were healthy and temperate in 
diet even if they did happen for the nonce to drink 
a posset; but they thought that the life of a man 
constitutionally sickly and intemperate was of no use 
to himself or others, and that the art of medicine 
should not be for such nor should they be given treat- 
ment even if they were richer than Midas.°” “ Very 
ingenious fellows,’’ he said, ““ you make out these 
sons of Asclepius to be.” 

XVI. “ Tis fitting,” said I; “ and yet in disregard 
of our principles the tragedians and Pindar? affirm 
that Asclepius, though he was the son of Apollo, was 
bribed by gold to heal a man already at the point of 
death, and that for this cause he was struck by the 
lightning. But we in accordance with the aforesaid 
principles * refuse to believe both statements, but if 
he was the son of a god he was not avaricious, we 
will insist, and if he was greedy of gain he was not 
the son of a god.’”’ “ That much,” said he, “ is most 
certainly true. But what have you to say to this, 
Socrates, must we not have good physicians in our 
city ? And they would be the most likely to be good 

# Cf. Aeschyl. Ag. 1022 ff., Eurip. Alcest, 3-4, Pindar, 
Pyth. iii. 53. *’ Of. 379 ff, also 365 E. 



pddora Towbror, door mAcloTovs peéev Byrewvovs, 
D wrclorovs S€ voodders petexerpicavto, Kal Sika- 
aTat ad Waattws ot mavtodamats Piccow cu- 
Ankotes. Kai pada, elrov, ayabods Adyeo adn’ 
ola8a ots ayotdpar Tovwodtovs; “Av cis, &pn. 
"Aa TEtpaoop.a, jv 8 8 ey: ad pévto ody 
Spovov mpaypo. T@ abT@ Ady 7 T]pov. Ilds; eon. 
aTpol jev, elzov, Sewdrarou av yevowro, et eK 
maidwv ap$duevor mpos TH pavOdvew tiv téxvyv 
ws mAelaTous Te Kal TovnpoTdTos Gepacw duLAy- 
E cevav Kai abrol mdcas vocous Kdpovev Kal elev pur) 
mavu byrewol dice. od yap, oluat, compat. caua 
Jepamrevovaw: od yap av adra eveyddper kaka elvat 
more Kat yevéoBar: adda yuyf cdua, Hh ovK 
eyywpet KaKiVy yevouevny Te Kal ovoay ed TL 
Beparedew. “OpOds, epn. Atxaoris 35€ ye, & 
409 dire, buy puyis dpxet, F odk eyywpet ex veas 
€v movnpats yuyxais TeOpadPar te Kai wyiAnKéevar 
Kal mdvra adicypata adrny nducnkviav dieEedn- 
Avbévar, wate d&éws ad’ atris texpuaipecBar Ta 
trav ddwv ddichwara, ofov Kata o@pa vdcovs: 
GAN’ dzetpov adriy Kat axépatov det Kaxdv nOdv 
véav ovoav yeyovevat, et wedAee Kady Kayaby odca 
Kplvew byiOs Ta Sikara. S10 57 Kai edyfers veou 
évTes of emerkets daivovra Kal edeEarrarnror bd 
B trav adikwv, ate obdK éxovtes ev EavTois Tapadety- 
para duovo7abA tots movynpots. Kat pev 87, én, 
ofddpa ye avto mdaoxovow. Torydpro, qv & 

* Slight colloquial jest. Cf. Aristoph. ite 1158, Pax 1061. 
® Cf. Gorg. 465 c-p 



who had treated the greatest number of healthy and 
diseased men, and so good judges would be those who 
had associated with all sorts and conditions of men.” 
“* Most assuredly I want them good,” I said; “* but 
do you know whom I regard as such?” “I'll know 
if you tell,*” he said. ‘‘ Well, I will try,” said I. 
“You, however, have put unlike cases in one 
question.” “How so?” said he. “ Physicians, it 
is true,” I said, “‘ would prove most skilled if, from 
childhood up, in addition to learning the principles 
of the art they had familiarized themselves with the 

atest possible number of the most sickly bodies, 
and if they themselves had suffered all diseases and 
were not of very healthy constitution. For you see 
they do not treat the body by the body.” If they did, 
it would not be allowable for their bodies to be or to 
have been in evil condition. But they treat the body 
with the mind—and it is not competent for a mind 
that is or has been evil to treat anything well.” 
“Right,” he said. “But a judge, mark you, my 
friend, rules soul with soul and it is not allowable for 
a soul to have been bred from youth up among evil 
souls and to have grown familiar with them, and itself 
to have run the gauntlet of every kind of wrong-doing 
and injustice so as quickly to infer from itself the 
misdeeds of others as it might diseases in the body, 
but it must have been inexperienced in evil natures 
and uncontaminated by them while young, if it is to 
be truly fair and good and judge soundly of justice. 
For which cause the better sort seem to be simple- 
minded in youth and are easily deceived by the 
wicked, since they do not have within themselves 
patterns answering to the affections of the bad.” 
“ That is indeed their experience,” he said. “‘ There- 



eyes, od véov adda yéepovTa bet Tov ayabdv dica- 
oriy elvas, oypu.aB7) _veyovera Tijs dductas oidv 
€oTw: ovK olkeiav ev TH abrob buy evodcav 
noOnpevor, aA’ dMorpiav ev aAdotpias pepede- 
THKOTE ev TOAAS xpoven diacbdvecbar, olov meépuKe 
C Kaxov, emioripn, ovK éeutretpia olkela KEXpLEVOV. 
Tevvadtatos yotv, éfn, eouxev elvan 6 TowodTos 
Sucaorys. Kai ayabds ye, Hv 8 eyed, 6 ob Hpwras* 
6 yap eXev puxny dyabnv dyabds. 6 5é Sewds 
éxcetvos Kal KaxUT0TT0s, 6 Toda avTos pouenKas 
Kat Tavodpyos Te Kal aodods olduevos elvat, oTav 
pev oprotots Opry, dewos haiverar e€evrAaBovpevos, 
mpos Ta eV abr@ mapadelypata amocKoT@v: 
orav dé ayabois Kal mpeoButepots 79 mAnodon, 
D aBéXrepos ad paiverar, amor av Tapa Kalpov Kal 
ayvody byrés 700s, dre odK Exwv Tapdderypa TOD 
TovovTou’ TAcovaKis 5é€ ovnpots 7] xpnoTois éevTvy- 
xavev aodwtepos 7) dpabearepos & doce? elvar abT® 
Te Kai dAdots. Mavrdmrace pev ovr, eon, adn G7}. 
XVII. Od ToWvur, jv & eye, TovobTov xp7) TOV 
diuxaorny Cnreiv tov ayabdov te Kat coddv, adda 
TOV TMpOTEpov. movypia pev yap apeTHv TE Kal 
attiy ovmoT av yvoin, apetn dé dicews traidevo- 
E pevys xpovw aya attis Te Kal tovnpias émorti- 

@ éYiua0q: here in a favourable sense, but usually an un- 
translatable Greek word for a type portrayed in a character 
of Theophrastus. 

> For this type of character cf. Thucyd. iii. 83, and my 
comments in 7.4.P.A. vol. xxiv. p. 79. Cf. Burke, Letter 
to the Sheriffs of Bristol: ‘*They who raise suspicions on 
the good on account of the ihatent of ill men, are of the 
party of the latter; Stobaeus ii, p. 46 Bias én, of dyabol 
evardryrot, Menander, fr. 845 Kock xpyorod map’ dvdpds 
pndév vrovée: Kakdr. 



fore it is,” said I, “‘ that the good judge must not be 
a a but an old man, a late learner? of the nature 
of injustice, one who has not become aware of it as a 
property in his own soul, but one who has through the 
long years trained himself to understand it as an alien 
thing in alien souls, and to discern how great an evil it 
is by the instrument of mere knowledge and not by 
experience of his own.” “That at any rate,” he 
said, “ appears to be the noblest kind of judge.” 
“ And what is more, a good one,” I said, “ which was 
the gist of your question. For he who has a good 
soul is good. But that cunning fellow quick to 
suspect evil,® and who has himself done many unjust 
acts and who thinks himself a smart trickster, when 
he associates with his like does appear to be clever, 
being on his guard and fixing his eyes on the patterns 
within himself. But when the time comes for him to 
mingle with the good and his elders, then on the 
contrary he appears stupid. He is unseasonably 
distrustful and he cannot recognize a sound character 
because he has no such pattern in himself. But 
since he more often meets with the bad than the 
good, he seems to himself and to others to be rather 
wise than foolish.” “ That is quite true,” he said. 
XVII. “ Well then,” said I, “‘ such a one must not 
be our ideal of the good and wise judge but the former. 
For while badness could never come to know both 
virtue and itself, native virtue through education will 
at last acquire the science of both itself and badness.° 

¢ Cf. George Eliot, ddam Bede, chap. xiv.: “It is our 
habit to say that while the lower nature can never understand 
the higher, the higher nature commands a complete view of 
the lower. But I think the higher nature has to learn this 
comprehension by a good deal of hard experience.” 



pany Anyperan. copes obv obros, ds pot Soxe?, aAN’ 
ovx 6 Kaos ylyverat. Kat ej.ol, €dn, Evvdoxel. 
Odxodv Kal tarpuxny, olay elomev, peTa Tis 
TovavTns Siucaorucs Kara Tow vopoberncets, at 
Trav moNT@v cou Tovs pev edduets Ta. odpara at 
410 tas poxas Deparredoovor, Tovs dé pH, OooL per 
Kata o@pua Towdror, amobvnoKew edoover, Tovs 
d¢ Kara TV poxny Kaxopvets Kal dvedrous avTot 
dmroKxrevobaw ; To 0 yobv dpuoTov, epn, avTots TE 
Tots maaxovor Kal TH moAet otTw mepavtar. Ot 
de 52) véor, iy 8 eye, diAov 6 Ort <vAaBjoovrat oot 
Siuxaorurijs els xpetav iévat, TH amAn eKeivn pov- 
ouKh Xpapeevor, nv 81 epapev owdpoovrny ev- 
rixrew. Ti pays én. *Ap’ odv od Kata TavTa, 
B iyyy Tabra, 6 povauKds yupvaoruciy dudKwv, cay 
eGeXy, aipycet, WoTe pndev laTpiKfs Setobar 6 O Tt 
pa avdyicn ; “Epovye doxe?. Adra pny Ta yup 
vaota Kal Tovs movous mpos TO Oupoedes THs 
dvoews Brérwv Kaxkeivo eyeipwv tmovicet padAov 
”" A > a > 7 c m > \ A pe 
N mpos taxvv, ody Wamep ot adAow abAnTral pwns 
eveka, otia Kal movous petayerpilovtrar. “Opio- 
rata, 8 os. *Ap’ odv, nv 8° eyo, & Tradkwv, 

* Cf. Theaetet. 176 p “It is far best not to concede to the 
unjust that they are clever knaves, for they glory in the 
taunt.” Cf. Unity of Plato’s Thought, n. 21. 

»’ Only the incurable suffer a purely exemplary and 
deterrent punishment in this world or the next. Cf. infra 
615 ©, Protag. 325 a, Gorg. 525 c, Phaedo 113 &. 

° ultro, as opposed to édcovow. 

4 Cf. 405 c. Plato always allows for the limitation of the 
ideal by necessity. 

¢ The welfare of the soul is always the prime object for 



This one, then, as I think, is the man who proves 
to be wise and not the bad man.*” “‘ AndI concur,” 
he said. “Then will you not establish by law in 
your city such an art of medicine as we have described 
in conjunction with this kind of justice? And these 
arts will care for the bodies and souls of such of 
your citizens as are truly well born, but of those 
who are not, such as are defective in body they will 
suffer to die and those who are evil-natured and 
incurable? in soul they will themselves* put to death.” 
“ This certainly,” he said, “ has been shown to be 
the best thing for the sufferers themselves and for 
the state.” “ And so your youths,” said I, ‘‘ employ- 
ing that simple music which we said engendered 
sobriety will, it is clear, guard themselves against 
falling into the need of the justice of the court-room.” 
“Yes,” he said. “ And will not our musician, pur- 
suing the same trail in his use of gymnastics, if he 
please, get to have no need of medicine save when 
indispensable??” “I think so.” ‘‘ And even the 
exercises and toils of gymnastics he will undertake 
with a view to the spirited part of his nature® to 
arouse that rather than for mere strength, unlike 
ordinary athletes, who treat’ diet and exercise only 
as a means to muscle.” ‘“ Nothing could be truer,” 
he said. ‘“‘ Then may we not say, Glaucon,” said I, 

Plato. (Cf. 591.) But he cannot always delay to correct 
ordinary speech in this sense. The correction of 376 © here 
is of course not a change of opinion, and it is no more a 
criticism of Isocrates, Antid. 180-185, than it is of Gorgias 
464 B, or Soph. 228 ¥, or Rep. 521 ©. 
t peraxeplifovrac: this reading of Galen is more idiomatic 
n the ms. weraxeipcirax. Where English says ‘‘he is not 
covetous of honour as other men are,” Greek says “he (is) 
not as other men are covetous of honour.” 



Kat ot Kabiordvres povoikh Kal yupvacTiuKh 
C madevew ovx ob evekd TWes olovTat kabiaraow, 
iva TH pev TO o@ po. Bepamevowro, TH dé TV 
poynv; “AAAa ri pay ep. Kwbduvetovow, nv 
&° eyed, audorepa Tis poxis eveca TO [eyorov 
Kkafiorava. las 84; Od evvoeis, elzrov, ws 
SvariBevra adrny Thy Sidvoway, ot av yupvacTiKh 
pev dua Biov opudjowar, povoikys Se Ha) cabwvras ; 
7 dco. av Tovvavtiov diateOdow; Twos dé, 4 8 
Do ds, mépt déyets ; "Ayptorntés Te Kal oxAnpoTyros, 
Kal ad padarias TE Kal TEpoTnTos, iy So eye. 
"Eywye, edn, dre ot pev YUEVACTLKH aKpaTw 
Xp7odpLevor aypiotepot Too S€ovros dmoBatvovow, 
ot Oe povourf) padarcdérepot ab yéyvovrau a ws 
Kddvov avrots. Kai pyv, hv 8° eyo, TO ye ay pov 
TO Oupoedés av Tis pdocws mapexowTo, Kal dpbds 
pev tpadev avdpeiov av ein, uaddov 8 émrabev 
tod Séovtos axAnpov te Kal yademov yiyvowr’ av, 
Ws TO eikds. Aoxet por, dn. Ti d€; To jwepov 
E ody 7) diAdcodos av exo dows; Kal pwaddAov pev 
avebévtos adtod padakwrepov «in Tod SdéovTos, 
KaAdds de Tpadevros 7ILEpov Te Kal Koopuov; “Kote 
Ta0Ta.. Aciy b€ yé papev Tovs pihaxas dyporépa, 
exe Toure To) pice. Act yap. dKodv. 7pHO- 
aba Set adtas mpos adAAjAas; lds 8 ov; Kal 
Tod Mev Hpoopevov cwdpwv te Kal avdpeia 7 

@ Plato half seriously attributes his own purposes to 
the founders. Cf. 405-406 on medicine and Phileb. 16 c on 

> For the thought ef. Eurip. Suppl. 882 f. and Polybius’s 
account of the effect of the neglect of music on the 
Arcadians (iv. 20). 

¢ Cf. supra 375 c. With Plato’s doctrine of the two 



“that those who established ¢ an education in music 
and gymnastics had not the purpose in view that 
some attribute to them in so instituting, namely to 
treat the body by one and the soul by the other? ”’ 
“ But what?” he said. “It seems likely,” I said, 
“ that they ordained both chiefly for the soul’s sake.” 
“How so?” “‘ Have you not observed,” said I, 
“ the effect on the disposition of the mind itself? of 
lifelong devotion to gymnastics with total neglect of 
music? Or the disposition of those of the opposite 
habit?” “ In what respect do you mean ? ” he said. 
“In respect of savagery and hardness or, on the 
other hand, of softness and gentleness?” “I have ob- 
served,” he said,” “‘ that the devotees of unmitigated 

tics turn out more brutal than they should 
be and those of music softer than is good for them.” 
“And surely,” said I, “this savagery is a quality 
derived from the high-spirited element in our nature, 
which, if rightly trained, becomes brave, but if over- 
strained, would naturally become hard and harsh.” 
“think so,” hesaid. “ And again, is not the gentle- 
ness a quality which the philosophic nature would 
yield? This if relaxed too far would be softer than 
is desirable but if rightly trained gentle and orderly?” 
“That is so.” “‘ But our requirement, we say,° is 
that the guardians should possess both natures.” 
“Tt is.” “‘ And must they not be harmoniously 
adjusted to one another?” “Of course.” “‘ And 
the soul of the man thus attuned is sober and brave ?”’ 
temperaments cf. the distinction of quick-wits and hard- 
wits in Ascham’s Schoolmaster. Ascham is thinking of 
Plato, for he says: ‘** Galen saith much music marreth men’s 
manners; and Plato hath a notable place of the same thing 

in his book De rep., well marked also and excellently 
translated by Tully himself.” 

VOL. I U 289 


411 puyy; Ildvu ye. Tot 8€ avappdorov der Kae 
aypoxos; Kat pada. 

XVII. OBkody Orav bev TUS HovoLRy Tapexy 
karavnely Kat karaxely ris puxiis dua. TOV corey 
@omep Sia xwvyns as vov 57 yyets eAdyopev Tas 
yAukelas Te Kal padakas Kai Opynvedders appovias, 
Kal puvupilwy Te Kal yeyavwpevos bm THs WoAs 
duateAH tov Biov GAov, obdTos TO fev mpwToV, Et 

Br Gupoedes clxev, WOTTEp oidnpov euadage Kab 
XpnoyLov ef axpyorov Kal oxAnpod emoinacy" 
oray 8 eme XV tay) avin aNd, KnAj, TO peTa Tobro 
710% TIYKEL Kal AciBeu, € ews av exrney TOV Oupov Kat 
EKTELN aomep vebpa eK Tis poxts Kal 7ounon 
padBarov aixpnt yy. Idve pev obv, edn. Kat 
eav prev ye, wv 8 eyw, e& apyfs dioer abupov 
AdBn, taxd robro Sverpagatro: eav de Ovpoedy, 
aobevh Toujoas tov Oupov d€¥ppotrov dretpydoaro, 

Ca amo opiKpav Taxvd epeOilopevov Te Kal KaraoBev- 
vdpevov. dicpdxoNor obv Kal opyiAo. avi Bupio- 
1000s yeyevyyrar, dvoKoNas eumrAcou. Kopwd7j pev 
ovv. Ti b€; av av YUPVAOT UCT Toda Tovy Kal 
etwxfAra. <b pdda, povorxis de Kat didocodias 
py) amTyTat, od mp@Tov pev ev toxywv TO c@pa 
dpovipatos Te Kal Ouuod euminAara Kal avdpe.d- 


> Demetrius, Iept “Epu. 51, quotes this and the following 
sentence as an example of the more vivid expression following 
the less vivid. For the imagecf. Blaydes on Aristoph. Thesm. 
18, Aeschyl. Choeph. 451, Shakespeare, Cymbeline Ir. ii. 59 
“Tove’s counsellor should fill the bores of hearing.” 

¢ Cf. 398 pv-£, where the Opnvddets apyoviac are rejected 
altogether, while here they are used to illustrate the softening 
effect of music on a hard temperament. It is misspent 

ingenuity to harp on such “contradictions.” 

a“ — 


“Certainly.” “And that of the ill adjusted is 
cowardly andrude?” “ It surely is.” 

XVIII. “‘ Now when a man abandons himself to 
music to play * upon him and pour ? into his soul as it 
were through the funnel of his ears those sweet, soft, 
and dirge-like airs of which we were just now¢ speak- 
ing, and gives his entire time to the warblings and 
blandishments of song, the first result is that the 
principle of high spirit, if he had it, is softened like 
iron ? and is made useful instead of useless and brittle. 
But when he continues ¢ the practice without remission 
and is spellbound, the effect begins to be that he 
melts and liquefies/ till he completely dissolves away 
his spirit, cuts out as it were the very sinews of his 
soul and makes of himself a ‘feeble warrior.’2” 
“ Assuredly,” he said. “ And if,” said I, “ he has 
to begin with a spiritless* nature he reaches this 
result quickly, but if a high-spirited, by weakening 
the spirit he makes it unstable, quickly irritated by 
slight stimuli, and as quickly quelled. The outcome 
is that such men are choleric and irascible instead of 
high-spirited, and are peevish and discontented.” 
“Precisely so.”” “‘ On the other hand, if a man toils 
hard at gymnastics and eats right lustily and holds no 
truck with music and philosophy, does he not at first 
get very fit and full of pride and high spirit and 

* For images drawn from the tempering of metals cf. 
Aeschyl. Ag. 612 and Jebb on Soph. Ajax 650. 

* Cf. Theaetet. 165 © éwéxwv cai od dvcis, and Blaydes 
on Aristoph. Peace 1121. 

’ Cf. Tennyson's * Molten down in mere uxoriousness”’ 
(** Geraint and Enid”). 

’ A familiar Homeric reminiscence (JI. xvii. 588) quoted 
also in Symp. 174 c. Cf. Froissart’s “ un mol chevalier.” 

* Etymologically d@vuos =** deficient in @yyés.” 



Tepos yiyverat atros abdrod; Kai para ye. Ti 
dal; émevdav aAdo _bndev mparrn pnde Kowwvh 
D Movons pndauy, ovK et i Kai eviv adtod dido- 
pabes év TH yuyy, ate ovre pabijparos yevdpevov 
ovdevos ovTe CyTHpaTOs, ovte Adyou peTioxov 
oure Ths dAAns povoucts, dobevés Te Kal Kwoov 
Kat tudrAdgv yiyverat, ate ovdK €VELPO}LEVOV ovde 
Tpepouevov ovde Siaxabaipopevwy Td aicbjcewv 
avToo; Odrws, ey. MuaddAoyos 87, olwar, o 
TOLOOTOS ylyverat Kal _ayovoos, Kal mevBot pev dua 
Adyeov ovdev ETL XpHrae, Bia dé Kal dypidrnre 
E Gamep Onpiov mpos mavra Svamparrerar, Kal €v 
apabia Kal oKaoTnTe peta appvOuias re Kal 
> / ~ /, > ao 4 wv 

axyapiotias C7. Ilavraacw, 4 8° ds, odrws exer. 
> \ \ 4 UW uA ¢ uv 4 / A 
Emi 87) 88° ovre tovTw, ws coke, S¥o0 téyva Oeov 
éywy av twa dainv dedwxévar Tois avOpeois, 
povoucny TE Kal yopvaaruniy em TO Gupoedes Kat 
TO diAdcogov, odK emt buyny Kal oGpa, ef pn et 

> > > >? / hd 
mdpepyov, GAr én’ Exeivw, drrws av d.NAxj ow 

412 EvvappoobArov emuTewvopevey Kal avieevad pLéexpe 

Tob TpOonKOVTOS. Kai yap corer, eon. Tov 
KdAdor" dpa povourh YUpVvaoTLKHY KEpavvuvTa Kal 
peTpiwTata TH pvyt mpoodepovta, TodTov opbdrar’ 
av datpev elvar teAdws povoixwratov Kai €v- 
appootoratov, moAd paAdov 7 Tov Tas xopdas 
aAAjAats Evordvra. Eixdtws y’, edn, & Ld- 

2 A hater of rational discussion, as explained in Laches 
188 c, and the beautiful passage in the Phaedo 89 p ff. Cf. 
Minucius Felix, Octavius 14. 6 ** Igitur nobis providendum 
est ne odio identidem sermonum laboremus.”” John Morley 
describes obscurantists as ** sombre hierophants of misology. 

® For virtue as “music” ef. Phaedo 61 a, Laches 188 p, 
and lago’s “There is a daily music in his life.” The 



become more brave and bold than he was?”” “ He 
does indeed.’ ‘“ But what if he does nothing but 
this and has no contact with the Muse in any way, 
is not the result that even if there was some principle 
of the love of knowledge in his soul, since it tastes 
of no instruction nor of any inquiry and does not 
participate in any discussion or any other form of 
culture, it becomes feeble, deaf, and blind, because it 
is not aroused or fed nor are its perceptions purified 
and quickened?” ‘‘ That is so,” he said. ‘‘ And 
so such a man, I take it, becomes a misologist * and 
a stranger to the Muses. He no longer makes any 
use of persuasion by speech but achieves all his ends 
like a beast by violence and savagery, and in his 
brute ignorance and ineptitude lives a life of dis- 
harmony and gracelessness.” ‘‘ That is entirely 
true,” he said. ‘“‘ For these two, then, it seems there 
are two arts which I would say some god gave to 
mankind, music and gymnastics for the service of 
the high-spirited principle and the love of knowledge 
in them—not for the soul and the body except 
incidentally, but for the harmonious adjustment of 
these two principles by the proper degree of tension 
and relaxation of each.” ‘“ Yes, so it appears,” he 
said. “ Then he who best blends gymnastics with 
music and applies them most suitably to the soul is 
the man whom we should most rightly pronounce to 
be the most perfect and harmonious musician, far 
rather than the one who brings the strings into 
unison with one another.?”’. “ That seems likely, 

‘perfect musician” is the professor of the royal art of 
Politicus 306-308 ff. which harmonizes the two temperaments, 
not merely by education, but by eliminating extremes 
through judicious marriages. 



Kpartes. OdKodv Kal év TH mnew mpi, @ Dratxcv, 
dejoet Tod ToLwovTov Twos Gel emorarov, ei pede 
B% morirela owlecbar; Aejoer pévror ods ofdv té 
ye pdAvora. 

XIX, Ot pev 517) TU7r0L Tijs mauetas Te kal 
Tpophs odrot dy elev. _Xopelas yap ti av Ts 
Suefiow TOV TowovTav Kal Onpas TE Kal Kuvnyeota 
Kal yupvucods dydvas ka irmuKous 5 oxedov yap 
Tt Onda 51) Ott TovToLs Eropeva Se? adra elvat, Kal 

> / A ¢€ ~ ” s > 7 > /, 
ovKere xadera edpeiv. “lows, 7 8 ds, od yaderd. 
Kiev, hv 8’ eye: to 81) peta TobTo Ti ay piv 
Suaupetéov «in; ap ovK adrdv tovtwv oitwes 
av / \ »” / ra 7 \ 
apfovat te Kat dpfovrar; Ti pyv; “Ore pev 
mpeaBurépous Tovs apxovras det elvan, vewrEepous 
dé Tos dpXouevous, dfjAov; Ajpov. Kat tu ye 
Tovs dpiorous abray ; Kat ToUTO. 0: de yewpy@v 
apioto. ap od yewpyiKwtaro. yiyvovtra; Nat. 

~ > > \ / bl] \ a. Vi a 
Nov 8’, éetd1) dvrAdcwv adrods apiotous Set elvat, 
LS > / / , > ~ 
dp od dvAakikwrdtovs méAews; Nai. Ovdxodv 
dpovious Te els TobTo Set bmdpyew Kali Svvatods 
Kat €Te Kydeovas THs moAews; “Eott Tatra. 

/ / > 4 4 Sf “ / 
Kyjdouto bé y’ av tis udAvora TovTOV 6 TUyydvot 

~ > / ‘ \ ‘es > bal / 
pidav. “Avadykn. Kai piv trotro y’ av padvora 
prot, & Evudepew iyotro 7a avTa Kal €avT@ Kal 

@ This ‘‘epistates”’ is not the director of education of 
Laws 765 p ff., though of course he or it will control educa- 
tion. It is rather an anticipation of the philosophic rulers, 
as appears from 497 c-p. and corresponds to the nocturnal 
council of Laws 950 8 ff. Cf. Unity of Plato’s Thought, 
p. 86, note 650. 

> yép explains tira, or outlines. Both in the Republic 
and the Laws Plato frequently states that many details must 
be left to subsequent legislation. Cf. Rep. 379 a, 400 B-c, 



Socrates,” he said. ‘“‘ And shall we not also need 
in our city, Glaucon, a permanent overseer? of this 
kind if its constitution is to be preserved?” ‘‘ We 
most certainly shall.” 

XIX. “ Such would be the outlines of their educa- 
tion and breeding. For why°® should one recite the 
list of the dances of such citizens, their hunts and 
chases with hounds, their athletic contests and races ? 
It is pretty plain that they must conform to these 
principles and there is no longer any difficulty in 
discovering them.” “There is, it may be, no 
difficulty,” he said. “ Very well,” said I; “ what, 
then, have we next to determine? Is it not which 
ones among them “shall be the rulers and the ruled ?” 
“ Certainly.” ‘‘ That the rulers must be the elder 
and the ruled the younger is obvious.” “It is.” 
“ And that the rulers must be their best?” ‘“‘ This 
too.” “‘ And do not the best of the farmers prove 
the best farmers?” ‘“‘ Yes.” ‘“‘ And in this case, 
since we want them to be the best of the guardians, 
must they not be the best guardians, the most 
regardful of the state?” “Yes.” “They must 
then to begin with be intelligent in such matters 
and capable, and furthermore careful ? of the interests 
of the state?” ‘“ Thatisso.” ‘‘ But one would be 
most likely to be careful of that which he loved.” 
“ Necessarily.” “And again, one would be most 
likely to love that whose interests he supposed to 

403 p-E, 425 a-r, Laws 770 B, 772 a-B, 785 a, 788 a-B, 
807 £, 828 B, 846 c, 855 p, 876 p-E, 957 a, 968 c. 
° atrGy ro’rwy marks a class within a class. Cf. Class. 
Phil. vol. vii. (1912) p. 485. 535 4 refers back to this passage. 
igs argument proceeds by minute links. Cf. supra 
on D. 



[orav pddora]' exeivou prev ed mpatTovTos oloLTO 
EvpPaivew Kal €avt@ ed mpdrrew, wy dé, rodvar- 
tiov. Odrws, én. "Exdexréov ap ek TOV dow 
dvrdkwy tovovtous dv8pas, ot av oKoTrodow hp 
pddora daivwvrar Tapa mdvTa Tov  Biov, 6 pev 
E dv tH mode Hryjowvras Evadéepew, maon mpodvpia 
mrovetv, 6 8 av HN, pndevi Rigs mpaéar av eBerew. 
"Exurndecor yap, 6. Aoxet 87 pou TIpNTEOY 
avrovs elvan € €v amdoais Tats jAuctars, él pudarucot 
elot TovTov Tod Sdéypatos Kal pATE yonTevdpevor 
pyre Bralopevor exBdddovow emiAavOavopevot 
ddfav tiv Tod Troveiv deiv, & TH mode BéATLOTA. 
Twa, edn, Aéyets, THY exBodjv; "Eyé aot, epny, 
€pa. paiverat pow d0€a efvevar eK dvavolas 7) 
413 Exovoiws 7 dxovolws, éxovolws pev q pevdys Tob 
petapavOdvovros, dovotws d¢ maoa 7 dAn Os. 
To pev Tis ékovaiov, edn, pavdven, TO be Tis 
dcovatov Béopae pabetv. Te dat; ov kal ov yet, 
ebay eyo, TOV pev ayabav dKxovatws orépeoBat 
Tovs dvOpdarous, Tav b€ KaK@v Exovatuns ; 7 ob 
TO pev epetoba Tis dAn betas KaKov, TO O€ 
adnbevew ayalov; 7 od TO Ta ovra _SogaLew 
aAnbevew Soxet cou elvat; “AA, 7 8 ds, dpbds 
Aéyeis, Kal por Soxotow aKovTes adn fobs d0€ns 
orepioxecBat. Odvxoty KAatévres 7 yontevbevres 
7 Biacbévres todro maoxovow ; Ovdé viv, edn, 
pavOdvw. Tpayikds, fv 8° ey, Kwduvedm réyew. 
1 Bracketed by Hermann. 

® Cf. Crito 46 B, Xen. Mem. iii. 12. 7. 
> Cf. on 382 a and Sophist. 228 c, Marcus Aurelius vii. 63. 
¢ The preceding metaphors are in the high-flown, obscure 
style of tragedy. Cf. Thompson on Meno 76 &, Cratyl. 
et p, Aristoph. Frogs, passim, Wilamowitz, Platon, ii. p. 146. 



coincide with his own, and thought that when it 

he too would prosper and if not, the 
contrary.” “So it is,” he said. “‘Then we must 
pick out from the other guardians such men as to 
our observation appear most inclined through the 
entire course of their lives to be zealous to do what 
they think for the interest of the state, and who 
would be least likely to consent to do the opposite.” 
“That would be a suitable choice,” he said. “I 
think, then, we shall have to observe them at every 
period of life, to see if they are conservators and 
guardians of this conviction in their minds and never 
by sorcery nor by force can be brought to expel * from 
their souls unawares this conviction that they must 
do what is best for the state.” “ What do you mean 
by the ‘expelling’?” he said. “I will tell you, 
said I ; “ it seems to me that the exit of a belief from 
the mind is either voluntary or involuntary. Volun- 
tary is the departure of the false belief from one who 
learns better, involuntary that of every true belief.” 
“ The voluntary,” he said, “‘ I understand, but I need 
instruction about the involuntary.” ‘‘ How now,” 
said I, “don’t you agree with me in thinking that 
men are unwillingly deprived of good things but 
willingly of evil? Or is it not an evil to be deceived 
in respect of the truth and a good to possess truth ? 
And don’t you think that to opine the things that are 
is to possess the truth?” “ Why, yes,” said he, 
“ you are right, and I agree that men are unwillingly 
deprived of true opinions.2” ‘And doesn’t this 
happen to them by theft, by the spells of sorcery or by 
force?” “I don’t understand now either,” he said. 

“I must be talking in high tragic style,° ” I said ; “ by 



B kdarévras pev yap tovds peramevobévtas Aéyw Kat 
Tovs €mAavOavopevous, OT. THY mev xpdvos, TOV 
Sé Adyos eEarpovpevos AavOdver. viv ydp mov 
pavOdvers; Nai. Tods toivuy Biacbdvras réyw 

a“ an” > ts “a > ‘A 4 te 
ovs av odvvn Tis 7) GAyndwv petadoEdcar rowan. 
Kat toir’, bn, euabov, Kat dpbds A€yes. Tods 

A / e > > a“ \ i 

C puny yonrevbévras, ws éy@ua, Kav od pains elvas 
ee. / Bal ey? ¢ ~ i bal 
ot av petadokdowow 7 bp’ Hdovijs KnAnbevtes 7 
€ ‘ / , ” A > oo 
bo ddBov tu Seioavres. “Eouxe ydp, H 8 Gs, 
yonrevew mavTa doa amara. 

XX. “O toivyy dpte eAeyov, Cnrnréov, tives 
apioto. dvAaKes TOO tap avbTois Sdypatos, TOUTO 
¢ / an ~ , be ~ / 

Ws trowmrtéov, 6 av TH moAe det Sox@or BeATioTOv 

- A cal , \ > A > 
elvas adtovds moveiv. thpnTtéov 51 evOds ex Traidwr, 

di wv > + A ~ / 
mpobenevois Epya, ev ols av Tis TO TOLODTOV padvoTa 
emAavOavoiro Kai e€amaT@ro, Kal Tov pev phe 

D pova Kai dvocEararntov éyKpiréov, Tov dé xq) 
> / Wi / \ , > \ 
amoxpitéov. 4 yap; Nat. Kai mdvous ye abd Kai 
dAynddovas Kal ay@vas adbtois Oeréov, ev ofs tavra. 
tadra typntéov. "Opbds, éfn. Odxoiv, fv & 
€yw, Kal Tpitov eldovs TovTois yonTtetas dpAAav 
Tmowtéov, Kat Jearéov, womep tods mwAovs ent 
tovs odous te Kat DopvBous dyovres okoTodaw 

> / oe Ld wv > Ld > EA 
et doPepot, ovTw véovs ovTas eis Seiuar arra 

E xojuoréov Kai eis Adovas ad petaBAnréov, Ba- 
cavilovras mroAd paAAov 7 xpvaov ev mrupi, ef 
SvoyontevTos Kal edoxynuwy ev maou daiverat, 

* Cf. Dionysius 6 perabéuevos, who went over from the 
Stoics to the Cyrenaics because of pain in his eyes, Diog. 
Laert. vii. 166. 

> Cf. 584 4 yonrela. 


aimee TT, IL 


those who have their opinions stolen from them I 
mean those who are over-persuaded and those who 
forget, because in the one case time, in the other 
argument strips them unawares of their beliefs. Now 
I presume you understand, do you not?” “ Yes.” 
*‘ Well then, by those who are constrained or forced 
I mean those whom some pain or suffering compels 4 
to change their minds.” ‘‘ That too I understand 
and you are right.” “* And the victims of sorcery ° I 
am sure you too would say are they who alter their 
opinions under the spell of pleasure or terrified by 
some fear.” “Yes,” he said: “everything that 
deceives appears to cast a spell upon the mind.” 
XX. “Well then, as I was just saying, we must 
look for those who are the best guardians of the indwell- 
ing conviction that what they have to do is what they 
at any time believe to be best for the state. Then we 
must observe them from childhood up and propose 
for them tasks in which one would be most likely to 
forget this principle or be deceived, and he whose 
memory is sure and who cannot be beguiled we must 
accept and the other kind we must cross off from our 
list. Is not that so?” “‘ Yes.” ‘‘ And again we 
must subject them to toils and pains and com- 
petitions in which we have to watch for the same 
traits.” “‘ Right,” he said. ‘‘ Then,” said I, “ must 
we not institute a third kind of competitive test with 
regard to sorcery and observe them in that? Just 
as men conduct colts to noises and uproar to see if 
they are liable to take fright, so we must bring these 
lads while young into fears and again pass them into 
pleasures, testing them much more carefully than 
men do gold in the fire, to see if the man remains 
immune to such witchcraft and preserves his com- 





/ e ~ nn > \ ‘ ~ > / 
dvrAa€ atrod adv dayalds Kat povorkis Fs eudv- 
Oavev, evpvOudv te Kal eddpuoorov éavTov ev 
maou TovTois Tapéxwv, olos 57) av Mv Kal éeavT@ 

\ ‘ 

Kal oA xpnoywwratos «ln. Kal Tov del ey TE 


Tall Kal veavicxors Kal év avdpdor. Baca- 
vilopevov Kal axjpatov exBaivovra KaTaoTaTéov 
” a s ted wy \ \ L 

apxXovTa THs ToAews Kal PvAaKka, Kal Tyas SoTéov 
kal C@vte Kal teAcvTHCavTt, Tafpwv Te Kal TOV 
»* / nf / / \ A 
GAwy pvnpeiwy péytota yepa Aayxdvovra* Tov Se 

~ > 

[Li) TovodTov amoKpiréov. TovadTn Tis, WV 8 eyo, 
8 cal > , ¢€ > \ Z \ of 
oxet por, ® TAavKwv, 7 éexAoyn elvar Kat KaTa- 
oTacis Tay apyovrwy te Kal dvddKwv, ws eV 

4 \ PS) > > / 7, A 0 K A > / 
tumw, pi) dv dxpiBelas, eipjoba. Kai euol, 
> 7 
8’ ds, otrw ay datvera. *Ap’ odv ws adnOds 
> / a 4 A , “A 
dpOdratrov Kadciv tovTovs pev dvdakas travtedcis 

~ ” / ~ > ‘ / 
tav te eEwhev modepiwy t&v te evtds didAiwr, 
id e \ A , ¢ \ A 5 / 
OTrws ot ev pt) BovArcovrat, ot Se un SvvygovTas 

a \ \ / “A ~ ér 5A 
Kakoupyeiv, Tods dé veéous, ods viv 57 PvAakas 
exadodpev, emukotvpous te Kai BonOods tots Tav 
> , / wv Cal ” 

apxyovrwy Sédypacw; ~“Epouye doxe?, Edy. 

xX) Td ”“ = c a + ie > 4 A 

. Tis av obv tpiv, jv eyo, pnxavn 

yevoito Tav evddv Tdv ev SéovTe yeyvouevwv, Ov 

51) viv eAdyomev, yevvaidy re év yevdopévous tretoat 


padtotra pev Kal adtods Tods apxovTas, et dé py, 

tiv aAAnv wodw; Tlotev 1; &dn. Mndev Kawvor, 

¢ The concept unxavy or ingenious device employed by a 
superior intelligence to circumvent necessity or play provi- 


aE ——— 


posure throughout, a good guardian of himself and 
the culture which he has received, maintaining the 
true rhythm and harmony of his being in all those 
conditions, and the character that would make him 
most useful to himself and to the state. And he 
who as boy, lad, and man endures the test and issues 
from it unspoiled we must establish as ruler over our 
city and its guardian, and bestow rewards upon him 
in life, and in death the allotment of the supreme 
honours of burial-rites and other memorials. But 
the man of the other type we must reject. Such,” 
said I, “ appears to me, Glaucon, the general notion 
of our selection and appointment of rulers and 
guardians as sketched in outline, but not drawn out 
in detail.” “I too,” he said, “think much the 
same.” “Then would it not truly be most proper 
to designate these as guardians in the full sense of 
the word, watchers against foemen without and 
friends within, so that the latter shall not wish and the 
former shall not be able to work harm, but to name 
those youths whom we were calling guardians just 
now, helpers and aids for the decrees of the rulers ?” 
“T think so,” he replied. 

XXI. “ How, then,” said I, ‘‘ might we contrive 2 
one of those opportune falsehoods ® of which we were 
just now © speaking, so as by one noble lie to persuade 
if possible the rulers themselves, but failing that the 
rest of the city?” ‘* What kind of a fiction do you 
mean?” said he. “ Nothing unprecedented,” said 

dence with the vulgar holds a prominent place in Plato’s 
a and is for Rousseau-minded readers one of the 
angerous features of his political and educational philosophy. 
Cf. infra 415 c, Laws 664 a, 752 c, 769 ©, 798 B, 640 B. 

> Cf. 389 B. ¢ 389 Bf. 



qv 8 eyed, adda PDowuxucdy Tl, mporepov pev 78 
moMaxob yeyoves, ws dacw of Tounrat Kat 
mevreikacw, ed nudv dé od yeyovos odd’ ofda et 
yevouevov av, metcar Sé€ avyvis meots. “Os 
€oixas, epn, oxvobvTt Aéyew. Adéw S€ cor, iv re 
eyw, Kal par’ etkoTWs oKvelr, emrevdav ctw. 
D Aéy’, en, Kal }41) bopod. Aéyw 8: Kairou ovK 
olda omrota TOAuH 7 Totous Adyous Xpapevos €pa: 
Kal emixerpijow Tp@Tov pev avrovs TOUS dpxovras 
meifew Kal Tods oTpatiwTtas, emerta dé Kal THY 
aAAnv 7oAw, ws ap’ & hpets adtods erpéhomev TE 
Kal émaidevonev, Womep Ovelpata eddKouv Tatra 
mdvTa maoxew Te Kal ylyvecbar mepi adtovs, 
joav S€ tore TH GdAnOcia tad yhs evrds 
marr opLevoe kal Tpepopevor Kal avrot Kal Ta 
E ér7Aa atrdv Kat 7% GAAn oKev?) Snpuoupyoupern, 
erred?) be Tavredas _ EELPYATHEVOL oar, ws i) 
yh} avTovs pynTnp ovoa aviKe, Kal viv Se ws 

@ As was the Cadmus legend of the men who sprang from 
He dragon’s teeth, which the Greeks believed ofrws dmifavov 
Laws 663 ©. Pater, who translates the passage (Plato 
ner Platonism, p. 223), fancifully suggests that it is a 
‘miners’ story.” Others read into it an allusion to 
Egyptian castes. The proverb Weioua Powixdy (Strabo 
259 s) probably goes back to the Phoenician tales of the 

» Plato never attempts a Voltairian polemic against the 
general faith in the supernatural, which he is willing to 
utilize for ethical ends, but he never himself affirms “le 
surnaturel particulier.” 

© xai ud’ here as often adds a touch of humorous col- 
loquial emphasis, which our conception of the dignity of 
Plato does not allow a translator to reproduce. 

4 Perhaps ‘‘ that so it is that’? would be better. ws dpa as 




I, “ but a sort of Phoenician tale,* something that has 
happened ere now in many parts of the world, as the 
poets aver and have induced men to believe, but that 
has not happened and perhaps would not be likely to 
happenin our day ® and demanding no little persuasion 
to make it believable.’ ‘“‘ You act like one who 
shrinks from telling his thought,” he said. “ You 
will think that I have right good reason ¢ for shrinking 
when I have told,” I said. “ Say on,” said he, “ and 
don’t be afraid.” ‘“ Very well, I will. And yet I 
hardly know how to find the audacity or the words 
to speak and undertake to persuade first the rulers 
themselves and the soldiers and then the rest of the 
city, that in good sooth @ all our training and educat- 
ing of them were things that they imagined and that 
happened to them as it were in a dream; but that in 
reality at that time they were down within the earth 
being moulded and fostered themselves while their 
weapons and the rest of their equipment were being 

fashioned. And when they were quite finished the 

earth as being their mother ’ delivered them, and now 
as if their land were their mother and their nurse 

often disclaims responsibility for the tale. Plato’s fancy of 
men reared beneath the earth is the basis of Bulwer-Lytton’s 
Utopia, The Coming Race, as his use of the ring of Gyges 
(359 p-360 8) is of H. G. Wells’ Invisible Man. 

* The symbolism expresses the Athenian boast of auto- 
chthony and Plato’s patriotic application of it, Menex. 237 E- 
238 a. Cf. Burgess, “ Epideictic Literature,” University 
of Chigago Studies in Classical Philology, vol. iii. pp. 153- 
154; Tim. 24 c-p, Aeschyl. Septem 17, Lucretius ii. 641 f., 
and Swinburne, “* Erechtheus”’: 

All races but one are as aliens engrafted or sown, 
Strange children and changelings, but we, O our mother, 
thine own. 




~ a / LL 23 

TEpl pntpos Kal tpodod Tihs xwpas év F eiat Bov- 
AevecOal re Kal auvvew adrous, edv Tis em” adTHpy 
in, Kat brép tTav aGdAwv roditav ws adeApav 
” ‘ ~ ~ > t SY A uv 
évTwy Kal ynyev@v Siavoeicbar. OvdK érds, edn, 
mara. hoxvvov To Weddos A€yew. Ildvy, Fv 3 
> 4 > / > 7. ” \ \ ‘ ~ 
eyw, eixotws* add’ Gums aKove Kai TO Aowmov Tod 

, > \ A A A / , ae ~ / 
pvbov. é€are pev yap by mavTes of ev TH TOA 
> / e , A > ‘ ~ 
adeAhol, ws Pyoopev pos adTovs pvbodoyobrtes, 
> + Wa ‘ " hd A ¢ ~ ¢ 
add’ 6 Beds 7AdTTwr, door wEev Kudv ikavol apyew, 
xpvoov ev TH yeveoes EvveurEev adrois, did TywdTa- 

"7 139 ¢ Sta ee, ” ‘ 
Tol «low: Gaow 8’ émixoupor, adpyupov- aidynpov Sé 

A ‘ aA a ‘ a ” 
Kal xaAKkov Tots Te yewpyois Kal Tots aAXois 

~ id C3 a ” 

Snpvovpyots. are ovv Evyyeveis ovres mavTes TO 
pev ToAD Spolovs av byiv adrois yevv@rte, ort 

BS 6re ék xypvood yervyfein av dpyvpodv Kat &€ 

apyupod xpvoobv éxyovov Kal TaAAa mavra odtws 
1 , a > » \ a \ rs 
e€ dAdjAwv. Tots odv apxovat Kat mpOrov Kal ud- 
huota TapayyéAAa 6 Beds, 67ws pndevds otTw 
, > \ ” > Yj > , 
dvAakes ayalot e€covrar pd ovtTw adddpa 
duaAdtovar pyndev ws Tods exydvous, 6 Tt adrtois 

* ov« érés is comic. Cf. 568 a, and Blaydes on Aristoph, 
Acharn. 411. 

» Of. 468 £, 547 a, and ‘“‘already” Cratyl. 394 p, 398 a. 
Hesiod’s four metals, Works and Days 109-201, symbolize 
four successive ages. Plato’s myth cannot of course be 
interpreted literally or made to express the whole of his 
apparently undemocratic theory, of which the biologist 
Huxley in his essay on Administrative Nihilism says: 
“The lapse of more than 2000 years has not weakened the 
force of these wise words.” 



they ought to take thought for her and defend her 
against any attack and regard the other citizens as 
their brothers and children of the self-same earth.” 
“It is not for nothing,*”’ he said, “ that you were so 
bashful about coming out with your lie.” “It was 
quite natural that I should be,”’ I said; “ but all the 
same hear the rest of the story. While all of you in 
the city are brothers, we will say in our tale, yet God 
in fashioning those of you who are fitted to hold rule 
mingled gold in their generation,? for which reason 
they are the most precious—but in the helpers silver, 
and iron and brass in the farmers and other craftsmen. 
And as you are all akin, though for the most part you 
will breed after your kinds,‘ it may sometimes happen 
that a golden father would beget a silver son and that 
a golden offspring would come from a silver sire and 
that the rest would in like manner be born of 
one another. So that the first and chief injunction 
that the god lays upon the rulers is that of nothing 
else? are they to be such careful guardians and so 
intently observant as of the intermixture of these 
© The four classes are not castes, but are species which 
will generally breed true. Cf. Cratyl. 393 B, 394 a. 
# The phrasing of this injunction recalls Shakespeare’s 
Merchant of Venice, in fine: 
I'll fear no other thing 
So sore as keeping safe Nerissa’s ring. 
The securing of disinterested capacity in the rulers is the 
pons asinorum of political theory. Plato constructs his 
whole state for this end. Cf. Introd. p. xv. Aristotle, Pol. 
1262 b 27, raises the obvious objection that the transference 
from class to class will not be an easy matter. But Plato 
here and in 423 p-r is merely stating emphatically the 
tes of an ideal state. He admits that even if estab- 
ished it will some time break down, and that the causes of 
its failure will lie beyond human ken, and can only be 
expressed in symbol. See on 546-547. 
VOL. I x 305 


TovTwy ev tats yvyais mapapyeuKrat, Kal edv TE 
odbérepos éxyovos drdxaAKos 7 drroatdnpos ys {ynTat, 

C pndevt TpoTM Katehejoovow, ada THY Th poe 
mpoonkovaay TULTY drodovres 6 doovaw eis Onpioup- 
yous 7 «ls _yewpyous, Kal av ad €k ToUTwWY TLS 
dmdxpucos 7) bmdpyvpos Puy, TYLNOAVTES dvd€ovar 
TovsS pev eis purany, Tovs d€ els emucouplay, ws 
xpnopod ovTOS Tore Ty ToAw Siadbapiivar, oray 
avriy 6 oidnpos 7 uy) 6 xaAKos puddgy. TOUTOV oby 
Tov podov omws dy mrevabetev, € eyes TWA PNXAVIV; 

D Ovdsapeis, SP", omrws y dy abrot obrou" Omws 
pevr’ av of TOUTE vieis Kal of émeura oi T° Seats 
avipwrot of tatepov. ’AdAa Kal todro, jv 5 
eyo, <d av €xou 7pos TO waAdAov adrovs Ths ToAEwsS 
Te Kat adAAjAwv KndeoBar- oxedov yap Tt pavbdvey 
) Aéyers. XXII. Kal rodTo pev 6 e€eu omy av 
avro 7 din aydyn. 

[wets de _Tovrous TOUS ynyevets omAicavtes 
Tpodywev Hyoupevey TOV dpXovTwv. edOdv- 
tes 5€ Deacdcbwry Tijs mohews émov KdAAoToV 

E orparorredevoaobar, dbev Tovs TE evdov pdduor” 
av Katéxouev, el tis p47) €O€AoL Tots vopmots TreEt- 
Becbar, tovs te eEwlev amapdtyvorev, et mod€eptos 
womep AvKos emi Toimvny Tis tor, oTpaTtomTedev- 

@ The summary in Tim. 19 a varies somewhat from this. 
Plato does not stress the details. Cf. Introd. p. viii. 

* Plato’s oracle aptly copies the ambiguity of the bronze 
men’s answer to Psammetik (Herod. ii. 152), and admits of 
both a moral and a literal physical interpretation, like the 
“lame reign’ against which Sparta was warned. Cf. Xen. 
Hellenica iii. 3. 3. 

¢ Plato repeats the thought that since the mass of men 


metals in the souls of their offspring, and if sons are 
born to them with an infusion of brass or iron they 
shall by no means give way to pity in their treatment 
of them, but shall assign to each the status due to 
his nature and thrust them out? among the artizans 
or the farmers. And again, if from these there is 
born a son with unexpected gold or silver in his com- 
position they shall honour such and bid them go up 
higher, some to the office of guardian, some to the 
assistanceship, alleging that there is an oracle? that 
the state shall then be overthrown when the man of 
iron or brass is its guardian. Do you see any way of 
getting them to believe this tale?’ ‘“* No, not these 
themselves,” he said, “ but I do, their sons and 
successors and the rest of mankind who come after.*”’ 
“ Well,” said I, “ even that would have a good effect 
in making them more inclined to care for the state 
and one another. For I think I apprehend your 
meaning. XXII. And this shall fall out as tradition ¢ 

“ But let us arm these sons of earth and conduct 
them under the leadership of their rulers. And when 
they have arrived they must look out for the fairest 
site in the city for their encampment,’ a position from 
which they could best hold down rebellion against 
the laws from within and repel aggression from with- 
out as of a wolf against the fold. And after they 

can be brought to believe anything by repetition, myths 
framed for edification are a useful instrument of education 
and government. C/. Laws 663 ©-664 a. 

4 gin, not any particular oracular utterance, but popular 
belief from mouth to mouth. 

¢ The Platonic guardians, like the ruling class at Sparta, 
will live the life of a camp. Cf. Laws 666 x, Isoc. 



odpevor b€, Ovcavres ois yxpy, edvas Toumod- 
Buy: 7 TOs ; Ovrws, &oy. Odxoby Tovavras, 
oias Xeydvos Te oréyew Kal Bépous t ixavas elvar; 
Ilds yap ovdxi; oixnoers yap, €dn, (Soxets juot 
Aéyew. Nat, yy S° é€yw, otpatwwrikds ye, GAN’ 
416 0d xpynuatiorixds. Llds, én, ad TobTo Adyeus 
Svadepew exeivov; “Ey cou, qv & ey, metpa- 
copa elzrety. Sewdrarov yap mov mavrov Kal 
aicxvorov Touro TovovTous ye Kal otrw Tpepew 
Kdvas emuKouvpous Touviwv, ware v0 dxohactas 
7 Ayob 7 Twos ddAov KaKkod Vous adrods Tovs 
KUvas émyeiphoat Tots mpoBdtows KaKoupyely Kal 
av7t Kuv@v AvKois CpowwHFjvar. Aewdv, 7 8 ds: 
Baas 8 ov; Ov«odv pudaxréov mavrt TpOTreD, Ta) 
ToLooTov Hiv ot émriKoupot TOUnowar mpos Tovs 
moXiras, eed?) adbta@v xKpeittous eiolv, arti 
Evppdywv ebuevdv Seondrats dyptous dpopover- 
Odow ; DvAakréov, &d7. Odxodv TV peylorny 
Tijs evAaBeias Topeckevacpevor av elev, ei TO 
ovT. KaAds mremrandevpevor cioiv; "AMG pay eit 
y’, €bn. Kal eyoy” * elzov, Todro pev ovK dfvov 
ducxupilecbar, j pire DAavxey: 0 pevrot dipre 
C €Aéyouev, dgvov, ore bet avrovs Ths oplis Tuxeiv 
Traid<elas, Tus moTé eaTw, et pedAdovar TO peéyt- 
GTov EXEL pos TO Hpepor elvar adrois TE Kal TOIS 
1 Burnet and Adam read éye. 

2 Partly from caution, partly from genuine religious 
feeling, Plato leaves all details of the cult to Delphi. 
Cf. 427 B. ® For the limiting ye ef. 430 c. 

¢ Aristotle’s objection (Pol. 1264 a 24) that the Platonic 
state will break up into two hostile camps, is plagiarized in 
expression from Plato’s similar censure of existing Greek 
cities (422 ©) and assumes that the enforced disinterestedness, 



have encamped and sacrificed to the proper gods? 
they must make their lairs, must they not?” 
“ Yes,” he said. ‘*‘ And these must be of a character 
to keep out the cold in winter and be sufficient in 
summer?” “‘ Of course. For I presume you are 
speaking of their houses.” “Yes,” said I, “ the 
houses of soldiers’ not of money-makers.”” ‘‘ What 
distinction do you intend by that?” he said. “I 
will try to tell you,” I said. “It is surely the 
most monstrous and shameful thing in the world for 
shepherds to breed the dogs who are to help them 
with their flocks in such wise and of such a nature 
that from indiscipline or hunger or some other evil 
condition the dogs themselves shall attack the sheep 
and injure them and be likened to wolves“ instead 
of dogs.” “A terrible thing, indeed,” he said. 
“ Must we not then guard by every means in our 
power against our helpers treating the citizens in 
any such way and, because they are the stronger, 
converting themselves from benign assistants into 
savage masters?”’ “We must,” he said. “ And 
would they not have been provided with the chief 
safeguard if their education has really been a good 
one?” “ But it surely has,” he said. “ That,” said 
I, “dear Glaucon, we may not properly affirm,’ but 
what we were just now saying we may, that they 
must have the right education, whatever it is, if they 
are to have what will do most to make them gentle 

the higher education, and other precautions of the Platonic 
Republic will not suffice to conjure away the danger to 
which Plato first calls attention. 

# This is not so much a reservation in reference to the 
higher education as a characteristic refusal of Plato to 
dogmatize. Cf. Meno 86 8 and my paper “ Recent Platonism 
in England,” A.J.P. vol. ix. pp. 7-8. 




ye lo 
dvdAatropevots tr’ adtdv. Kal dpbds ye, 4 & 
ds. [Ipods roivey rH maideta tadrn dain av tis 
voov éxwv Seiv Kal Tas oiknoes Kal THY aAAnv 
, a ov 
ovoiav tova’Tyvy avrois mapacKevdcacba, rts 
pyre tovs dvAaxas ws apiorous elvar mavaor 
adtovs, Kakoupyeiv Te 1) emapot rept Tovs aAAous 
, ‘ > ~ / vo / 
troditas. Kat ddAnbds ye djoe. “Opa 8x, «tzov 
> cal a \ 
€yw, et Towovde TWA TpoToV Set adTods Cv TE Kat 
a ~ ~ \ 
otkety, et peAAovat Tororo. €oeoGar: mp@Tov pev 
ovoiav KeKTnévov pndepiav pndéva idiav, av pn 
~ a \ 
mdoa avdykn* €meiTa olKnoWw Kal Tapuelov pndeve 
elvat pndev Towodrov, eis 6 od mas 6 Bovddpevos 
” \ > > / a / ” 
eigercot: Ta 8 emiTHdeva, Gawv Séovtar avdpes 
abAntat modduov ow@dpovés te Kal avdpetor, 

Eragapévovs mapa tav ddAwy moditOv dSéxeo8at 


pucbov tis dvAakijs tocobrov, dcov pyre TreEpretvae 
adtots eis Tov eviavTov pyre evdeiv: horr@vras de 
eis €vocitia Womep eoTpatomedevpevous KoWwh 
Civ: xpvoiov dé Kal dpytpiov eimety atrois ort 
Oetov mapa Oedy det ev TH tuyh Exovor Kal ovdev 
mpocdéovrat Tod avOpwretov, ovdé Gara THY €KEt- 
vou KTHow TH Tod Ovntod yxpvao0d KTHOEL Eup- 
puyvivras puaiver, Sidr TOAAG Kal avoowa TEpl TO 
Tov TOMY voptcpa yeyovev, TO Tap’ ekelvors SE 
axjparov: aAAd pdvots adrois Tay év TH TmoAEL 

* Plato’s communism is primarily a device to secure dis- 
interestedness in the ruling class, though he sometimes treats 
it as a counsel of perfection for all men and states. Cf. 
Introd. p. xv note a. ; 

> Cf. supra 403 £. : 

¢ Cf. 551 zn, Meno 91 Bs, Thucyd. i. 108, G.M.T. 837. 

4 They are worthy of their hire. Cf. on 3474, It isa 
strange misapprehension to speak of Plato as careless of 



to one another and to their charges.” “‘ That is 
right,” he said. ‘‘ In addition, moreover, to such an 
education a thoughtful man would affirm that their 
houses and the possessions provided for them ought 
to be such as not to interfere with the best per- 
formance of their own work as guardians and not 
to incite them to wrong the other citizens.” “He 
will rightly affirm that.” “Consider then,” said I, 
“whether, if that is to be their character, their 
habitations and ways of life must not be something 
after this fashion. In the first place, none must 
possess any private property * save the indispensable. 
Secondly, none must have any habitation or treasure- 
house which is not open for all to enter at will. 
Their food, in such quantities as are needful for 
athletes of war sober and brave, they must receive 
as an agreed © stipend ? from the other citizens as the 
wages of their guardianship, so measured that there 
shall be neither superfluity at the end of the year 
nor any lack.? And resorting to acommon mess’ like 
soldiers on campaign they will live together. Gold 
and silver, we will tell them, they have of the divine 
quality from the gods always in their souls, and they 
have no need of the metal of men nor does holiness 
suffer them to mingle and contaminate that heavenly 
possession with the acquisition of mortal gold, since 
many impious deeds have been done about the coin 
of the multitude, while that which dwells within them 
is unsullied. But for these only of all the dwellers in 
the welfare of the masses. His aristocracy is one of social 
service, not of selfish enjoyment of wealth and power. 

* This is precisely Aristophanes’ distinction betwee. 
beggary and honourable poverty, Plutus 552-553. 

7 As at Sparta. Cf. 458 c, Newman, Introduction to 
Aristotle’s Politics, p. 334. 




petaxerpilecbar Kal dmrecfar ypvood Kal apyd- 
pov od Oéuts, 0885’ to Tov adrov dpodov tevat 
nde / 0 35e f > > A nn 
ovde mepidibacbar ovde rivew e& dpytpov 7 
Xpvood. Kai ovTw pev awlowrTd 7” av Kal owlovev 
\ / ¢€ / > > \ od LANES ‘ Pay 
Thy ToAw: omdéte 8 adrol yhv te idiav Kal oikias 
Kal vopiopaTa KTHGOVTAL, OlKOVoMoL ev Kal 
\ > \ / ” 4 > 
yewpyot avtt dvddkwy oovra, Seomdtar § 
> ‘3 \ / ~ ” ~ / 
exOpot avri Evppdywy tov aGAAwv moditav yevn- 
govrat, uucobdvtes Sé 87) Kal pucovpevor Kal e7mt- 
BovdAevovres Kai emBovAevopevor Sid€ovor mavrTa 
\ , \ / \ ~ / A 
tov Biov, 7oAd mAciw Kai paddAov dedudTes Tods 
” ”“ ‘\ wv , - ” i4 
evdov 7) Tods e€whev troAculous, Aéovres dn TOTE 
>? ta > / > / \ ¢ ” / 
eyyttata oAdfpov atroi te Kai % adAn OAs. 
ToUTwY obv TavTwY eveka, Hv S eyw, P@pmev ovTw 
detv Kateoxevacba tos dvAakas olkioews Te 
~ ~ nn 
mépt Kal TOV GAAwv, Kal Tabra vopobericwpev, 7 
/ ‘ Il / - ie a“ ¢ TA / 
uy; Ildvv ye, 7 8 ds 6 TAavcwvr. 

* As if the accursed and tainted metal were a polluted 
murderer or temple-robber. Cf. my note on Horace, Odes 
iii. 2. 27 “ sub isdem trabibus,” Antiphon vy. 11. 

> Cf. 621 B-c, and Laws 692 a. 

© becréra. Cf. Menewx. 238 x. 

@ Cf. Laws 697 p in a passage of similar import, picodyres 



the city it is not lawful to handle gold and silver and 
to touch them nor yet to come under the same roof 
with them, nor to hang them as ornaments on their 
limbs nor to drink from silver and gold. So living 
they would save themselves and save their city.” But 
whenever they shall acquire for themselves land of 
their own and houses and coin, they will be house- 
holders and farmers instead of guardians, and will be 
transformed from the helpers of their fellow-citizens 
to their enemies and masters,” and so in hating and 
being hated,? plotting and being plotted against they 
will pass their days fearing far more and rather ® the 
townsmen within than the foemen without—and 
then even then laying the course’ of near shipwreck 
for themselves and the state. For all these reasons,” 
said I, “ let us declare that such must be the pro- 
vision for our guardians in lodging and other respects 
and so legislate. Shall we not?” ‘“‘ By all means,” 
said Glaucon. 

* more and rather: so 396 vp, 551 B. 

* The image is that of a ship nearing the fatal reef. Cf. 
Aeschyl. Eumen. 562. The sentiment and the heightened 
rhetorical tone of the whole passage recall the last page of 
the Critias, with Ruskin’s translation and comment in 
A Crown of Wild Olive. 


ij / 





419 I. Kal 6 ’Adeipavros trodaBuv, Ti obv, én, & 
Lewikpates, atoAoyice, edv tis ce PH wy) wavy Te 
evdaipovas Toveiy TovToUs Tovs avdpas, Kal Tadra 

> e / e ” ‘ ¢< / a > , © 
du’ éavtovs, dv eat pev 7) OAs TH aAnOeia, ot 
dé pndev amoAavovow ayalov tis moAews, ofov 
aAAot aypovs TE KEKTNMEVOL Kal OiKias oiKOSopov- 
prevot KaAds Kal peyddAas, Kal TavTaLs mpémrovoav 
KaTacKeuny KTapevor, Kal Ouvaias ODeois idias 
4, \ ~ ‘ A , mf ~ \ ‘ 
Ovovres Kal Eevodoxobvtes, Kat 57) Kal & viv 81) od 
éXeyes, ypvodv Te Kal dapyvpov KeKTnEvoL Kal 
mavTa ooa vopilerar Tots péAAovor pakaplois 
> > > a / mv A 2 of 
elvat; ad atexvds, dain av, womep émixovpor 
A > ~ / / ~ > A 

420 prcOwrot ev tH woAce fatvovrat Kabjaba ovdev 
” an ~ Ul > > 4, ‘ Ved 
adAro 7» dpovpobtvres. Nail, qv 8 eyw, Kat rabra 

2 Adeimantus’s criticism is made from the point of view of 
a Thrasymachus (343 a, 345 B) or a Callicles (Gorgias 492 
s-c) or of Solon’s critics (¢f. my note on Solon’s Trochaics 
to Phokos, Class. Phil. vol. vi. pp. 216 ff.). The captious 
objection is repeated by Aristotle, Pol. 1264 b 15 ff., though 
he later (1325 a 9-10) himself uses Plato’s answer to it, and 
by moderns, as Herbert Spencer, Grote, Newman to some 
extent (Introduction to Aristotle's Politics, p. 69), and Zeller 
(Aristotle, ii. p. 224) who has the audacity to say that 
* Plato demanded the abolition of all private possession and 
the suppression of all individual interests because it is only 



I. Anp Adeimantus broke in and said, “‘ What will be 
your defence, Socrates, if anyone objects that you 
are not making these men very happy,” and that 
through their own fault? For the city really belongs 
to them and yet they get no enjoyment out of it as 
ordinary men do by owning lands and building fine 
big houses and providing them with suitable furni- 
ture and winning the favour of the gods by private 
sacrifices” and entertaining guests and enjoying too 
those possessions which you just now spoke of, gold 
and silver and all that is customary for those who 
are expecting to be happy? But they seem, one 
might say, to be established in idleness in the city, 
exactly like hired mercenaries, with nothing to do 
but keep guard.” “Yes,” said I, “and what is 

in the Idea or Universal that he acknowledges any title to 
true reality.” Leslie Stephen does not diverge so far 
from Plato when he says (Science of Ethics, p. 397): 
“The virtuous men may be the very salt of the earth, and 
yet the discharge of a function socially necessary may 
involve their own misery.” By the happiness of the whole 
Plato obviously means not an abstraction but the concrete 
whole of which Leslie Stephen is thinking. But from a 
higher point of view Plato eloquently argues (465 B-c) that 
duty lied will yield Gils happiness to the guardians 
than seeking their own advantage in the lower sense of 
the word. 

> Cf. 362 c, and Laws 909 pb ff. where they are forbidden. 



ye €mioitior Kal ovd€ pucbdv mpos Tots atriots 
apBavovtes wamrep of adAoL, wore odd’ av azro- 
8 ond 5A Hoyt rats > a 45° 
npejoa BovrAwrvra idia, e&€orar avdtois, ov 
¢ / / 29> > / »” 4 
éraipats Siddvar odd’ avadioxew av trou BovAwvrat 
LAA e on) ¢ ie) / 8 ~ t 
adAXooe, ofa 87) of eddaipoves SoKodvtes clvar 
> ~ ~ ~ 
avaAioxovat. tadta Kat aAda Tovatra ovyva Tis 
Ud > , > > Pa ” ‘ 
Katnyopias amoAeimes. “AAX’, 7 8° Os, EoTW Kal 
Braira karnyopynpéeva. Ti odv 37 amodoynodpcba 
la / Y Pune » Was | > ee a ras 
dys; Nat. Tov adrov oipov, jv 8 eye), mopevo- 
> ~ 
pevou edpnoopev, Ws ey@mat, a AeKTéa. Epovpev 
7 A 
yap, oT. Oavpacrov pev av oddev ely, €i Kal odTOL 
ovTws eVdayoveaTatol eiow, od pV mpos TOdTO 
Cc a 
BAémovtes tiv moAw oikilopev, Gmws Ev TL Hiv 
” ” / ” > ,. oe 
EOvos €otat Svahepovtws evdaipov, GAN’ dws 6 TL 
pdAuata 6An % mods. wHOnwev yap ev TH ToL- 
7, / nn e ~ 4 \ > > a 
avr pdduora, dy edpeiv Sucavoowvny kai ab €v TH 
C kaxiota olkoupéevy adiKiav, KaTidovTes dé Kptvat 
~ ~ > 
av, 6 mada Cytoduev. viv peév odv, ws olopeba, 
\ > / / b > / 5A 
tiv eddaiwova mAdtTopev odK amoAaBdvTes oAL- 
> 7 A 4 A /, > 2. 4 
yous é€v avth Tovovtous Twas TWHevtes, GAN’ GAnv* 
abrixa Sé ri évavtiav oKepducba. dotep odv 
dv, et Huds avdpidvra ypadovras mpoceAOa@v tis 
a / Li 2 a / lon A \ 
édeye A€ywv, dtt od Tots KaAXioTots TO Cwov Ta 

* Other men, ordinary men. Cf. 543 B Gy viv of 
&\\o., which disposes of other interpretations and mis- 

> This is, for a different reason, one of the deprivations of 
the tyrant (579 B). The Laws strictly limits travel (949 £). 
Here Plato is speaking from the point of view of the 
ordinary citizen. 

¢ The Platonic Socrates always states the adverse case 
strongly (Introd. p. xi), and observes the rule: 

Would you adopt a strong logical attitude, 
Always allow your opponent full latitude. 



more, they serve for board-wages and do not even 
receive pay in addition to their food as others do,* so 
that they will not even be able to take a journey ® on 
their own account, if they wish to, or make presents 
to their mistresses, or spend money in other directions 

ing to their desires like the men who are 
thought to be happy. These and many similar 
counts of the indictment you are omitting.” “‘ Well, 
said he, “ assume these counts too.°” ‘‘ What then 
will be our apology you ask?” “ Yes.” “ By follow- 
ing the same path I think we shall find what to reply. 
For we shall say that while it would not surprise us 
if these men thus living prove to be the most happy, 
yet the object on which we fixed our eyes in the 
establishment of our state was not the exceptional 
happiness of any one class but the greatest possible 
happiness of the city as a whole. For we thought @ 
that in a state so constituted we should be most 
likely to discover justice as we should injustice in 
the worst governed state, and that when we had 
made these out we could pass judgement on the issue 
of our long inquiry. Our first task then, we take 
it, is to mould the model of a happy state—we are 
not isolating ¢ a small class in it and postulating their 
happiness, but that of the city as awhole. But the 
opposite type of state we will consider presently’ It 
is as if we were colouring a statue and someone ap- 
proached and censured us, saying that we did not 

2 Cf. 369 a. 

* dmodaBerres, “ separating off,” “ abstracting,” may be 
used absolutely as in Gorgias 495 ©, or with an object as 
supra 392 &. 

* That is 449 « and books VIII. and IX. The degenerate 
types of state are four, but the extreme opposite of the good 
state, the tyranny, is one. 



KdAAora Pdppara mpooriBenev- of yap dhbawoe 
KdAdotov dv ovK Gorpetyy evan Auppevor elev adda, 
D peda: petpiws av edoxodpev mpos avrov dro 
AoyetoBar Aéyovtes, @ Oavpdore, pH olov detv mas 
ovtw Kadovs dfbadpods ypagew, wore pende 
dpbadpods paivecbar, pnd? ab TaAAa peépn, aM’ 
abpe <i Ta TpoonKovTa éExdorous dmrodibovres TO 
ohov Kadov TrovoDpev" Kal 82) Kal vov pn avayKale 
mwas Touadryy evdaxpoviav Tots porage mpoo- 
anew,  éxelvous av paMov amepyaoeTat 7 

E dvAakas. émvotadpeba yap Kat TOUS yewpyovds 


Evoribas dudiécavres Kat xpuaov mepevres mpos 
mdovny epyaleobar Kedevew TiVv yay, Kal Tovs 
Kepapeas KararAivavres emdetua mpos TO mp dia- 
mivovTds TE Kal edwYoupevous, TOV Tpoxov mapa 
bepévous, 6 doov av emBupaor Kepapevew, Kal Tovs 
dous mdvras TOLoUTW TpdOTH paKaplous mroveiv, 
iva 51 on a mous eddatpovi: aad’ pas py ovTw 
vouberet ws, av cou meIaiicba., ovTE O yewpyos 
yewpyos €oTat oUvTE 0 Kepapeds Kepapeds oUTe 
dMos ovdels ovddev EXov oxjya, €€ wv mods 
ylyverau. ard TOV pev ddAwy eddrrey Adyos: 
vevpoppador yap patAor yevopevor kat duadOapevtes 

* So Hippias Major 290 z. 
> For this principle of aesthetics cf. Phaedrus 264 c, 

Aristot. Poetics 1450 b 1-2. 

¢ “We know how to.” For the satire of the Socialistic 
millennium which follows ¢f. Introd. p. xxix, and Ruskin, 
Fors Clavigera. Plato may have been thinking of the scene 
on the shield of Achilles, //. xviii. 541-560. 

4 j,e, so that the guest on the right hand occupied a lower 
place and the wine circulated in the same direction. sect 
write él deéid, but A émdésia.  “ F orever, tis a single wor 
Our rude forefathers thought it two.” 



apply the most beautiful pigments to the most beauti- 
ful parts of the image, since the eyes,? which are the 
most beautiful part, have not been painted with purple 
but with black—we should think it a reasonable justi- 
fication to reply, ‘ Don’t expect us, quaint friend, to 
paint the eyes so fine that they will not be like eyes 
at all, nor the other parts, but observe whether by 
assigning what is proper to each we render the whole 
beautiful.?’ And so in the present case you must not 
require us to attach to the guardians a happiness 
that will make them anything but guardians. For 
in like manner we could ¢ clothe the farmers in robes 
of state and deck them with gold and bid them 
cultivate the soil at their pleasure, and we could 
make the potters recline on couches from left to 
right ? before the fire drinking toasts and feasting with 
their wheel alongside to potter with when they are 
so disposed, and we can make all the others happy 
in the same fashion, so that thus the entire city may 
be happy. But urge us not to this, since, if we yield, 
the farmer will not be a farmer nor the potter a 
potter, nor will any other of the types that constitute 
a state keep its form. However, for the others it 
matters less. For cobblers ¢ who deteriorate and are 

* Note the “ab urbe condita” construction. For the 
thought cf. 374.8. Zeller and many who follow him are not 
justified in inferring that Plato would not educate the masses. 
(Cf. Newman, Introduction to Aristotle’s Politics, i. p. 160.) 
It might as well be argued that the high schools of the 
United States are not intended for the masses because some 
people sometimes emphasize their function of “ fitting for 
college.” In the Republic Plato describes secondary educa- 
tion as a preparation for the higher training. The secondary 
education of the entire citizenry in the Laws marks no 
change of opinion (Laws 818 ff.). Cf. Introd. p. xxxiii. 



‘ / \ wy / 29. 
Kal mpoomomodpevor elvar pr) OvTes mdAcr ovdev 
Sewov: dvdAakes 5€ vopwv Te Kal moAEws pun) OVTES 
> \ ~ cia ‘ a ~ »” / 
adda SoKxodvtes dpds 8) Ste macav apdnv moAw 
amoAdvaow, Kal ad Tod ed oixeiv Kal eddayovety 
pdvot Tov Katpov éxovow. ef pev odv ets pe 
B dvAaxas ws aAnbds mowtpev, Kota Kakovp- 
~ A 4 
yous Tis moAews, 6 8 exeivo Adywv yewpyous 
Twas Kal Womep ev mavnytper GAN’ od« ev TdAeEt 
¢ / > / ” + ” / , 
éaTidtopas evdaipovas, aAAo av te 7 7dAw A€yot. 
~ \ 
okemTéov obv, TOTEpoV mpds TobTO BA€rovTESs TOUS 
dvAakas KabioT@pev, O7ws 6 Tt mAcioTH ad- 
Lal A \ 
Tots evdaysovia eyyernoeTar, 7) ToOTO pev eis THV 
moAw GAnv BAémovtas Oearéov ef exelvn eyytyve- 
tat, Tovs 8 émikovpous TovTovs Kal Tovs PvAakas 
7 a bl 
C éxetvo dvayxaoréov moveiv Kal mevoTéov, Omws 6 
Tt aptoto. Snpovpyot tod éavt@v epyov €aovrat, 
kal tovs dAXdovs amavtas woatTtws, Kal oUTwW 
Evurdons ths moAews adfavouervns Kal Kadds 
oixilouerns eatéov Gmws éxdotots Tots eOveow 7) 
dva.s d7odiéwat Tob petadapPavew eddaovias. 
II. "AAW, 4 & dbs, Kad@s prot Soxets Aéyew. 
7A > > > BS See ‘ \ , iS r \ 86. 
p ovv, jv & éyw, Kal To TovTov adeAdov S0&w 
co. petpiws Aéyew; Ti padcota; Tods dddous 
D ad Sypuovpyods oxdme ei Tade Siadbeipar, wore 
‘ F a ~ “A 
Kal Kaxovds ylyvecOar. Ta wota 8) tadra; IlAod- 
tos, WV 8 eyw, Kai mevia. Ids dy; *Q8e- wAov- 

* The expression is loose, but the meaning is plain. The 
principle ‘“‘one man, one task’’ makes the guardians real 
guardians. The assumption that their happiness is the end 
is incompatible with the very idea of a state. Cf. Introd. 
pp. xxix f. éo7idropas recalls wéddovra éoridcec bar 345 c, but 
we are expected to think also of the farmers of 420 E. 

> The guardians are Snusoupyol éNevGepias (395 c). 



spoiled and pretend to be the workmen that they are 
not are no great danger to a state. But guardians 
of laws and of the city who are not what they pre- 
tend to be, but only seem, destroy utterly, I would 
have you note, the entire state, and on the other 
hand, they alone are decisive of its good government 
and happiness. If then we are forming true guardians 
and keepers of our liberties, men least likely to harm 
the commonwealth, but the proponent of the other 
ideal is thinking of farmers and ‘ happy ’ feasters 
as it were in a festival and not in a civic community, 
he would have something else in mind? than a state, 
Consider, then, whether our aim in establishing the 
guardians is the greatest possible happiness among 
them or whether that is something we must look to 
see develop in the city as a whole, but these helpers 
and guardians are to be constrained and persuaded 
to do what will make them the best craftsmen in 
their own work, and similarly all the rest. And so, 
as the entire city develops and is ordered well, each 
class is to be left to the share of happiness that its 
nature comports.” 

II. “ Well,” he said, “I think you are right.” 
“ And will you then,” I said, “ also think me reason- 
able in another point akin to this?”’ “ What pray?” 
“ Consider whether these are thé causes that corrupt 
other® craftsmen too so as positively to spoil them.* ” 
“What causes?” “ Wealth and poverty,” ? said I. 

* Sorexai xaxovs, I think, means “sothat they become actually 
bad,” not “so that they also become bad.” Cf. Lysis 217 s. 

4 For the dangers of wealth cf. 550, 553 pv, 555 B, 556 a, 
562, Laws 831 c, 919 B, and for the praises of poverty cf. 
Aristoph. Plutus 510-591, Lucian, Nigrinus 12, Eurip. fr. 
55 N., Stobaeus, Flor. 94 (Meineke iii. 198), Class. Phil. 
vol. xxii. pp. 235-236. 

VOL. I Y 321 


TH}OAs xutpeds Soke? cou Ere DeAjoew emueAeioBau 
THS TEXINS 5 Ovdayds, ey. ’Apyos de Kal 
duedr)s yevijoerat paMov avros airod; IloAv YE 
dKoby Kakiwv xuTpeds yiyveran ; Kai robo, 
épy, modv. Kat pay Kal opyava ye pa exeov 
mapéxeoOar b770 amevias n tT aAXo Trav eis TH 
E TEXYNY, | Td Te epya Tovnporepa épydoeran kal 
Tous vteis % dAXovs ots ay diddony xelpous 
Sypwoupyods dWadterau. Ilds 8” ov; ‘Yo dyucpo - 
Tépwv Oy, mevias TE kat mAovrou, Xelpw pev Ta 
TOV Texv@v py, xetpous dé avroi. Paiverar. 
“Erepa 57}, Ws €ouKe, Tots pdhagwv evpnKapev, a 
mavrt TpoTrn gvAakréov omws pymote avtods 
Ajoew «is THY mddw Tapadvvra.. Ilota Taira; 
422 IlAofrds TE, Wy om eyes, Kat mevia, ws Tob pev 
tpudiy Kal apyiav Kal VEWTEpLopov TowdvTos, Tob 
dé avedevdepiay Kai KaKkoepyiav mpds TO vewrTe- 
~ / \ s ” / /, s 
prop@. Ilavy pev obdv, edn. Tdde pevTo, @ 
LewKpates, oKorret, ms Hey n ods ota = eorat 
monet, emevday xXpHpwara pa) KexTnpern 7, dAAws 
Te Kav mpos peydAnv TE kal movotay dvayKaob yj 
TroAepeiv. Ajrov, jv 8 eye, ort m™pos- fev piav 
B XaAremestepov, mpos de dvo Touavras pdov. Ids 
eles; 8° 6 Os. IIparov ev trou, elzov, éav den 
pdxeobar, dpa ov zAovaiots avBpdou paxobvrat 
adrot ovres ToAguov abAntat; Nat rob7d ye, édn. 

* Apparent paradox to stimulate attention. Cf. 377 a, 
334 a, 382 a, 414 B-c, 544c, Laws 646 8. To fight against 
two was quasi-proverbial. Cf. Laws 919 8. For images 
from boxing ef. Aristot. Met. 985 a 14, and Demosthenes’ 
statement (Philip. i. 40-41) that the Athenians fight Philip 
as the barbarians box. The Greeks felt that ‘lesser breeds 



“How so?” “Thus! do you think a potter who 
grew rich would any longer be willing to give his 
mind to his craft?” “By no means,” said he. 
“ But will he become more idle and negligent than 
he was?” “Far more.” “Then he becomes a 
worse potter?”” “‘Farworse too.’ “ And yet again, 
if from poverty he is unable to provide himself with 
tools and other requirements of his art, the work 
that he turns out will be worse, and he will also make 
inferior workmen of his sons or any others whom he 
teaches.” “‘ Of course.” ‘‘ From both causes, then, 
poverty and wealth, the products of the arts deteri- 
orate, and so do the artisans?”’ “So it appears.” 
“Here, then, is a second group of things, it seems, that 
our guardians must guard against and do all in their 
power to keep from slipping into the city without 
their knowledge.” ‘‘ What are they?” “ Wealth 
and poverty,” said I, “ since the one brings luxury, 
idleness and innovation, and the other illiberality 
and the evil of bad workmanship in addition to in- 
novation.” “ Assuredly,” he said; “ yet here is a 
point for your consideration, Socrates, how our city, 
possessing no wealth, will be able to wage war, 
especially if compelled to fight a large and wealthy 
state.” “‘ Obviously,” said I, “it would be rather 
difficult to fight one such, but easier to fight two.*” 
“What did you mean by that?” he said. “ Tell 
me first,’ I said, “ whether, if they have to fight, 
they will not be fighting as athletes of war? against 
men of wealth?” ‘“ Yes, that is true,” he said. 

without the law” were inferior in this manly art of self-de- 
fence. Cf. the amusing description of the boxing of Orestes 
and Pylades by the dyyedos in Eurip. J.T. 1366 ff. 

» Cf. 416 £, 403 FE. 



Ti obv, iv S eyed, & ’Adeiyavre; els mdKTns ds 
olév te KdANota emi tobtro tTapecKkevacpévos 
dvoiv py) mUKTawW, tAovoiow 5é Kal mdvow, odK 
av SoKet cou padiws pdxeoBar ; Odx dy lows, 
éon, apa ye. Ov" él efetn, Hv 8 eye, bmo- 
C gevyovrs tov mpdrepov det mpoodepopevov ava- 
orpepovTa Kpovew, k Kal Tobro Trovot 7 7oAAdKts €v y Ate 
Te kal miyers apd. ye ov Kal mA€elovs xeipwoar 
adv To.ovTovs 6 ToLovTos; “Apdder, | egy, ovdev 
av yéevoito Oavpacrov. "AAW ovK olet TUKTUK AS 
mAé€ov petéxeww Tovs tAovoiovs émoTHUN TE Kal 
eureipia 7) moAcuiKis; “Eywy’, &bn. “Padiws 
dpa nuiv ot abAnral ex Tdv eikdtwv SimAaciors 
TE Kal tpitAaciots adrav Paxobvrat. Lvyxwpyco- 
D pai oo, epn* Soxets yap pow ophas Acyeuw. Té 
8’, av mpeaBelav mrepspavres ets TH érépav moXw 
adn OA elwow, OTe jets pev ovddev xpvoiw ove” 
dpyupiw xpwpe8a, odd jv Oéwus, bpiv dé: 
Evpmrodcunoavres oby pel HL@v EXETE Ta TOV 
érépoov’ oleu Twas dxovoavras Tatra atpjoecba 
Kvat mroAepetv orepeois TE kal toxvots parrov 7 
peTa KUVaYV mpoBarous moot te Kal amadois; Ov 
pot Soxe?. add’ eav eis play, eon, mohw éuv- 
E abpovoO Ta T@v GAAwv ypywara, dpa pur) Kivdvvov 
géepn Th 2) tAovToOvon. Evdatpev el, iv & eyes, 
ort oven afvov elvae aAAnv TWa TMpoceitrety TOAW 7 
TH Tovadrny olay %ets KareoKevdlopev. "Ada 

vi pny; édyn. Meldvws, fv 8 eyed, xp) mpoo- 

* Of. Herod. iv. 111. 
> Two elements of the triad gvo.s, wedérn, eriorhun. Of. 
supra 374 D. 



“ Answer me then, Adeimantus. Do you not think 
that one boxer perfectly trained in the art could 
easily fight two fat rich men who knew nothing of 
it?”’ ‘Not at the same time perhaps,” said he. 
“ Not even,” said I, ‘if he were allowed to retreat * 
and then turn and strike the one who came up first, 
and if he repeated the procedure many times under 
a burning and stifling sun? Would not such a fighter 
down even a number of such opponents ?’’ “ Doubt- 
less,” he said; “ it wouldn’t be surprising if he did.” 
“ Well, don’t you think that the rich have more of the 
skill and practice ° of boxing than of the art of war?” 
“TI do,” he said. “It will be easy, then, for our 
athletes in all probability to fight with double and 
triple their number.” “I shall have to concede 
the point,” he said, ‘‘ for I believe you are right.” 
“Well then, if they send an embassy to the other 
city and say what is in fact true*: ‘ We make no use 
of gold and silver nor is it lawful for us but it is for 
you: do you then join us in the war and keep the 
spoils of the enemy,’4—do you suppose any who heard 
such a proposal would choose to fight against hard 
and wiry hounds rather than with the aid of the 
hounds against fat and tender sheep?” “I think 
not. Yet consider whether the accumulation of 
all the wealth of other cities in one does not involve 
danger for the state that has no wealth.” ‘“‘ What 
happy innocence,” said I, “‘ to suppose that you can 
properly use the name city of any other than the 
one we are constructing.” ‘‘ Why, what should we 
say?” he said. ‘A greater predication,” said I, 

¢ Cf. Herod. vii. 233 rav adnfécrarov Tay Néywr, Catull. x. 
9 **id quod erat.” 

* The style is of intentional Spartan curtness. 



, -~ 
ayopevew tas dAdas: éxdoTtn yap adt@v modes 
) Pee} ~ 
€lot mdapmoAAat, GAN’ od mdéXAs, TO TOV TalovtTwr. 

, lot 
dvo pév, Kav dtiwdv %, moAepia GAAjAats, % pev 

423 mevptwv, 4 5€ mAovoiwy: todTwv 8 ev ExaTépa 

4 a 
mavu Toda, als édav pév Ws pia mpoodépy, TavTos 
” ¢ / 2. \ ¢ a \ ‘ ~ 
av apdptos, éav d€ ws moAAats, dud0ds Ta THV 
cst a 
ETEpwv Tots ETépos xpHpaTa Te Kal Svvdpets 7} Kal 

> tal 
avtovs, Evppdyous pev det moAdois xpyoet, mo- 
Aepious 8° dAlyous. Kai Ews av 7 mods Gor oiKA 
awhpdvws ws aptu éerayOn, peyiorn eorat, od TO 
evdoxiety Aéyw, GAN’ ws GAnOds peyiorn, Kal éav 

, ~ 
fLovov 7} xXAiwy tdv mpoToAcpovvTwv: otTw yap 

BpeydAnv modw pilav od padiws otte ev “Enow 
ovte ev BapBdpos edpyoeis, Soxodaas dé moAAas 
kat 7oAAamAacias THs THAUKavTns. 7 GAAws ole; 

> A ‘ ie) ” 
Od pa tov Ac’, édn. 

III. Odxodv, jv 8 eyed, obtos av «in Kal Kad- 
Avatos Gpos Tots WueTEépors apyovow, donv Set To 
péyebos tHv mow Trovetobar Kal HAiKkn oven Sonv 
xapav adopisapevous tiv adAnv xaipew eav. Tis, 
” 7 > , > 8 > ° , 5 / bag 
éfn, Opos; Olua per, jv 8 eyed, révde- péexpe 0b 

@ * As they say in the game” or “in the jest.” The general 
meaning is plain. We do not know enough about the game 
called réXeis (ef. scholiast, Suidas, Hesychius, and Photius) 
to be more specific. Cf. for conjectures and details Adam’s 
note, and for the phrase Thompson on Meno 77 a. 

» Of. Aristot. Pol. 1316 b 7 and 1264 a 25. 

¢ Aristotle, Pol. 1261 b 38, takes this as the actual number 
of the military class. Sparta, according to Xenophon, Rep. 
Lac. 1. 1, was T&v é\vyavOpwrordrwy rodewr, yet one of the 
strongest. Cf. also Aristot. Pol. 1270 a 14f. In the Laws 



“‘ must be applied to the others. For they are each 
one of them many cities, not a city, as it goes in the 
game.* There are two at the least at enmity with 
one another, the city of the rich and the city of the 
poor,” and in each of these there are many. If you 
deal with them as one you will altogether miss the 
mark, but if you treat them as a multiplicity by offer- 
ing to the one faction the property, the power, the 
very persons of the other, you will continue always 
to have few enemies and many allies. And so long 
as your city is governed soberly in the order just laid - 
down, it will be the greatest of cities. Ido not mean 
greatest in repute, but in reality, even though it have 
only a thousand ¢ defenders. For a city of this size 
that is really one? you will not easily discover either 
among Greeks or barbarians—but of those that seem 
so you will find many and many times the size of this. 
Or do you think otherwise ?”’ “‘ No, indeed I don’t,” 
said he. 

III. “ Would not this, then, be the best rule and 
measure for our governors of the proper size of 
the city and of the territory that they should 
mark off for a city of that size and seek no more?” 
“What is the measure?” “TI think,” said I, “ that 

Plato proposes the number 5040 which Aristotle thinks too 
large, Pol. 1265 a 15. 

Commentators, I think, miss the subtlety of this sentence ; 
ulay means truly one as below in p, and its antithesis is not 
so much zo\Ads as doxotcas which means primarily the 
appearance of unity, and only secondarily refers to weyddnr. 
cai then is rather “and” than ‘“‘even.” ‘*So large a city 
that is really one you will not easily find, but the semblance 
(of one big city) you will find in cities many and many times 
the size of this.” Cf. also 462 a-s, and my paper «Plato's 
Laws and the Unity of Plato’s Thought,” Class. Phil. 1914, 
p. 358, For Aristotle’s comment cf. Pol. 1261 a 15. 



av €0éAn avgopevn elvat pela, péxpt TovTOU adgew, 
C mépa dé py. Kat nadrds Ys édyn. Ovdxodv Kat 
TodTo ad aAXo mpooraypa tots PvAage mpoordgopev, 
puddrrew mavrt TpoTw, Omws pTE opLKpa 7 
mods EoTrat pnTe peydAn Soxotca, adAd Tis tkav7 
‘ , \ a\y/ > »” ” > a 

kat pia. Kai datdAdv y’, &by, tows avtois mpoo- 
tagowev. Kai rovrov ye, jv 8 eyed, ere davdd- 
Tepov Tdd€e, OD Kai ev TH Tpdcbev ereuvnaOnpev 
Aéyovres, as déor, edv Te TOV dvddkwv tis PaddAos 
exyovos yevnrar, eis rods dAAovs avdrov dro 
D wéurrecOa, eav 7 éx TOv GAAwv omrovdaios, els Tovs 
pvraxas. todto 8 eBovAeTo SyAobv, Ste Kal Tovs 

Ld /, \ Ld / ‘ ~ 
adAAovs moAitas, mpos 6 Tis TmépuKE, TmpPOs TOUTO 
éva mpos €v Exactov épyov det Komilew, omws av 
“A \ ¢ a > tA Ld \ / > \ 
év TO abrod émitndevwv Exactos pi) ToAAol, aAda 
els ylyynta, Kat odTw 81) Evprraca 7 TdAts uta. 

4 > A A / ” /, ” ~ 
duyntat, aAAd pr) ToAAai. “Eote yap, éfy, Todo 
> / . « ” > > , —° % A 
éxeivov opiKpdotepov. Odvror, hv 8 eyd, @ “yale 
7AS / ¢ 5 / ” ~ AA A ‘ 
ejuavte, ws ddferev av tis, TadTa ToAAa Kat 

4 3 a / > ‘ , ~ 
E peyddra adbtois mpoordtropev, adda mavra dadda, 
2A A , a / / col > 
€av TO Aeyopevov ev péeya duvdAdtrwor, waAdrov 6 

> A / c / / A ” \ 

avti peyddov ixavev. Ti todro; egy. THv ma- 

* The Greek idea of government required that the citizens 
should know one another. They would not have called 
ase lon, London or Chicago cities. Cf. Introd. p. xxviii, 

wler, Greek City State, passim, Newman, Aristot. Pol. 
La i. Introd. pp. 314-315, and Isocrates’ complaint that 
Athens was too large, Antid. 171-172. 

® Tronical, of course. 

¢ Cf. on 415 B. 

¢ The special precept with regard to the guardians was 
significant of the universal principal, ‘‘ one man, one task.” 



they should let it grow so long as in its growth 
it consents* to remain a unity, but no further.” 
“‘ Excellent,” he said. “‘Then is not this still 
another injunction that we should lay upon our 
ians, to keep guard in every way that the city 
shall not be too small, nor great only in seeming, but 
that it shall be a sufficient city and one?”’ “ That 
behest will perhaps be an easy” one for them,” he said. 
“And still easier, haply,”’ I said, “is this that we men- 
tioned before® when we said that if a degenerate off- 
spring was born to the guardians he must be sent away 
to the other classes, and likewise if a superior to the 
others he must be enrolled among the guardians ; 
and the purport of all this was “ that the other citizens 
too must be sent to the task for which their natures 
were fitted, one man to one work, in order that each 
of them fulfilling his own function may be not 
many men, but one, and so the entire city may come 
to be not a multiplicity but a unity.’’ ‘* Why yes,” 
he said, “this is even more trifling than that.” 
“ These are not, my good Adeimantus, as one might 
suppose, numerous and difficult injunctions that we 
are imposing upon them, but they are all easy, 
provided they guard, as the saying is, the one great 
thing ’—or instead of great let us call it sufficient.” 
“What is that?” he said. “Their education and 
“8 443 c, 370 B-c (note), 3945, 374 a-p, Laws 846 pv- 
* It is a natural growth, not an artificial contrivance. 
For Aristotle’s criticism ¢f. Pol. 1261 a. 
4 The proverbial one great thing (one thing needful). 
The 1 ish perhaps is: wéAN old ddwarné GAN éxivos & wéya 
(Suidas). Cf. Archil. fr. 61 é & éricrapos wéya, Polit. 297 a 

péxpurep ay év wéya puddtTwot. 
9 wéya has the unfavourable associations of éros néya, and 
ixavév, **adequate,”’ is characteristically preferred by Plato. 



Selav, jv & éeyd, Kat Tpopny. éav yap ed Tal- 
Sevdpevor pérptot dvdpes ylyvevrat, TravTa Tatra 
padiws Sioipovrat kat ddAa ye, doa viv tpets 
TmapaAetmopev, THY TE Tay yovakOv Kriow Kad 
424 yduwy Kai mauorrovias, ore Set Taira Kara THY 
Tapoy.lay mavTa O Tt pddora Kowd 7a pirwv 
movetoBae. ’Opbdrara yap, epn, yiyvour’ dy. Kat 
pH, elroy, modtela, eavrep amak opunon €v, 
EpXeTau wamep Kdkdos adfavouevn. Tpody) yap 
Kat Traidevats _XpnoT7) owlouevn dvcets dyabas 
eutrovel, Kal ad dvoeis xpynoTal TouavTns mauetas 
avTiAapBavomevat et BeArious TOV TpoTepwv 
B pvovras els Te TAAAG Kal eis TO yevvay, woTrep Kat 
év tots dAXots Casous. Eixds y’, on. ‘Os Tolvuv 
dua Bpaxéwy elzreiv, Tovrou dvBexr€ov Tots ém- 
peAntais Tis Tohews, Orrws av avrovs 7) Adby 
Siapbaper, ada. Tapa Tdvra. avro purdrrwo., TO 
Ty vewrepilew Tept yupvaorucny Te Kal povouny 
Tapa Thy Taku, add’ ws oldv Te pddvora fvaar- 
tew doBovpévovs, dtav tis A€yn, Ws THY dowdy 
LGANov éemuppovéovow avOpwror, 

4 Cf. on 416 8. Plato of course has in mind both the 
education already described and the higher education of 
books VI. and VII. 

» The indirect introduction of the proverb is characteristic 
of Plato’s style. Cf. on 449 c, where the paradox thus lightly 
introduced is taken up for serious discussion. Quite 
fantastic is the hypthesis on which much ink has been 

wasted, that the Ecclesiazusae of Aristophanes was su a9 
by this sentence and is answered by the fifth poche 
Introd. pp. xxv and xxxiv. It ought not to be necessary a 
repeat that Plato’s communism applies only to the guardians, 
and that its main purpose is to enforce their disinterested- 



nurture,’ I replied. ‘‘ For if a right education? 
makes of them reasonable men they will easily dis- 
cover everything of this kind—and other principles 
that we now pass over, as that the possession of wives 
and marriage, and the procreation of children and all 
that sort of thing should be made as far as possible 
the proverbial goods of friends that are common.?” 
“Yes, that would be the best way,” he said. ‘“‘And, 
moreover,” said I, “ the state, if it once starts ° well, 
proceeds as it were in a cycle 4 of growth. I mean that 
a sound nurture and education if kept up creates 
good natures in the state, and sound natures in turn 
receiving an education of this sort develop into better 
men than their predecessors both for other purposes 
and for the production of offspring as among animals 
also.”’’ “It is probable,” he said. ‘To put it 
briefly, then,” said I, “it is to this that the overseers 
of our state must cleave and be watchful against its 
insensible corruption. They must throughout be 
watchful against innovations in music and gym- 
nastics counter to the established order, and to the 
best of their power guard against them, fearing when 
anyone says that that song is most regarded among 

ness. Cf. Introd. pp. xv and note a, xxxiv, xlii, xliv, and 
“ Plato’s Laws and the Unity of Plato’s Thought,” p. 358. 
Aristotle’s criticism is that the possessions of friends ought to 
be common in use but not in ownership. Cf. Pol. 1263 a 30, 
and Eurip. Androm. 376-377. 

© Cf. Polit. 305 D ri dpytw re Kal opuyr. 

# No concrete metaphor of wheel, hook or circle seems 
to be intended, but only the cycle of cumulative effect of 
education on nature ana nature on education, described in 
what follows. See the evidence collected in my note, Class. 
Phil. vol. v. pp. 505-507. 

* Of. 459 a. 



id > / 4 > /, 
Hts aevddovrecou vewrdTn aydiméAnrat, 

C HI) ToMAd.xKts TOV mounrify TUS olnrau Aéyew ovK 
dopara véa, adda 7 Orrov pois véov, Kal Tobro 
erawy. det 8 ovr emrauvely TO ToLobTOY oUTE 
broAapBdavew.  «ldos yap KaLvov fLovoikfs peTa- 
BadXew eVAaBnréov ws ev dry KuSuvevorra’ 
ovdapob yap KwobvTar povorkijs Tpdzrot avev 
ToNTiKav vopev TOV peyioTa, | as nat Te 
Adj Kal éya metBopar. Kat ee Toivuv, epn 6 
*Adeiwavros, bes THV TETELO LEVY. 

D_ IV. To 8) pvdacriprov, i 5° eye, ws eouKev, 
evtab0d mov olxoSopuntéov Tots pirat, € EV [LOUVOLKT}. 
‘H_ yotv Tapavor.ta., edn, pedius avTn AavOdver 
Tapadvop.ern . Nai, édynv, ws ev mradids ye [epee 
Kol chs iaucav, obSeY epyacopevn. Oude yap epyd- 
Cera, ebm, aAXo ve 7 Kara OpiKpov eloouKioapevT) 
npewa vmoppel mpos Ta 719m Te Kal Ta €TUTQ-= 
evpata: ex dé tovtwy eis Ta mpos aAAjAovs 


® Od, i. 351. Our text has émixdelove’ and dxovévyrecct. 
For the variant ef. Howes in Harvard Studies, vi. p. 205. 
3 ie the commonplace that new songs are best ef. Pindar, 

ix. 52. 

> Cf. Stallbaum on Phaedr. 238 pv-2, Forman, Plato 
Selections, p. 457. 

¢ The meaning of the similar phrase in Pindar, Ol. iii. 4 
is different. 

4 novotxhs Tpdrou need not be so technical as it is in later 
Greek writers on music, who, however, were greatly in- 
fluenced by Plato. For the ethical and sont oan of 
music ¢f. Introd. p. xiv note c, and supra 401 p-404 a, also 
Laws 700 p-8, 701 a. 

¢ Of. Protag. 316 a, Julian 150 8. 

4 The etymological force of the word makes the metaphor 
less harsh than the English translation * guard- -house.”’ Cf. 
Laws 962 c, where Bury renders * safeguard.”’ Cf. Pindar’s 



which hovers newest on the singer’s lips,* 

lest haply ® it be supposed that the poet means not 
new songs but a new way of song ° and is commending 
this. But we must not praise that sort of thing nor 
conceive it to be the poet’s meaning. For a change 
to a new type of music is something to beware of 
as a hazard of all our fortunes. For the modes of 
music? are never disturbed without unsettling of the 
most fundamental political and social conventions, as 
Damon affirms and as I am convinced.*”’ “Set me 
too down in the number of the convinced,” said 
IV. “It is here, then,” I said, “in music, as it seems 

that our guardians must build their guard-house‘ and 
post of watch.” “It is certain,” he said, “that 
this is the kind of lawlessness? that easily insinuates * 
itself unobserved.” ‘“* Yes,” said I, “‘ because it is 
supposed to be only a form of play‘ and to work no 
harm.” “ Nor does it work any,” he said, “ except 
that by gradual infiltration it softly overflows’ upon 
the characters and pursuits of men and from these 
issues forth grown greater to attack their business 

ate Aeyupas, the sharpening thing, that is, the whetstone, 
. Vi. 82. 

9 wapavoula besides its moral meaning (537 £) suggests 
lawless innovation in music, from association with the musical 
sense of véuos. Cf. Chicago Studies in Class. Phil. i. p. 22 
n. 4. 

* So Aristot. Pol. 1307 b 33. 

* Cf. the warning against innovation in children’s games, 
Laws 797 a-8. But music is rasdeia as well as rardid. Cf. 
Aristotle’s three uses of music, for play, education, and the 
entertainment of leisure (Pol. 1339 a 16). 

4 Cf. Demosth. xix. 228. The image is that of a stream 
overflowing and spreading. Cf. Eurip. fr. 499 N. and 
Cicero’s use of ** serpit,”” Cat. iv. 3, and passim. 



EvpBoraa peilwv exBaiver, ee Sé 57 Tov Evp- 

E Bodaiwy épyetar emi tods vdpmous Kal 7oAuTeias adv 


oN, @ LaKpares, doedyeia, ews av teAcvTdoa 
mdvra idia Kal dnpooia avatpéyn. Elev, jv & 
eyes ovTw Toor €xeu; Aoxet jot, edn. Ovxobv 
6 e& apyfs éAéyopev, tots twerépors mrasoly év- 
vopwrtéepov edOds mradids eOeKTéov, Ws Tapavdpov 
yryvoperns adbrijs Kai traidwy TovovTwy evvojous TE 
kal omovdatovs e€ atrdv dvdpas advédvecPa 
advvarov ov; Ilds 8 odyi; edn. “Orav 8) dpa 
KaAds ap&duevor traides trailew edvopiay Sa THs 
povaiks eiadéEwvrat, maw Tobvaytiov 7 *Keivous 
els mavra Evvéretai te Kal avfer, emavopboica et 
Tl Kal TpOTEpov THs TOAEws Exetto. “AAnOA pevror, 
éon. Kai 7a opixpa dpa, elrov, Soxobdvta elvas 
vopipa e€evpioxovow ovToL, & of mpdoTepov am- 
wArAvoavy mavra. Iota; Ta rowude- avyds te 
TOV vewrépwv Tapa mpeaButéepots, Gs mpézet, Kal 
KatakXicets Kal bravactdoets Kal yovéewy Depa- 
melas, Kal Koupds ye Kal dpumrexdovas Kal brodécets 
Kal OAov Tov TOO GwpaTos oXNnMaTLopOV Kal TaAAG 
doa Towatra. 7 ovK over; "Eywye. Nopobereiv 
8’ adra olwa evnbes: ovtTe yap mov yiyveta ovr 
dv peiverev, Aoyw TE Kal ypdupacr vouobernberta. 

2 Cf. on 389 pv. 
> The reference is to the general tenour of what precedes, 
¢ apérepov is an unconscious lapse from the construction 
of an ideal state to the reformation of degenerate Athens. 
Cf. Isoc. Areopagiticus 41 ff., and Laws 876 B-c, 948 c-p. 
4 For these traits of old-fashioned decorum and modesty 
gf Aristoph. Clouds 961-1023, Blaydes on 991, Herod. ii. 
80, Isoc. Areopagit. 48-49. 
: Cf. Starkie on Aristoph. Wasps 1069. 



dealings, and from these relations it proceeds 
against the laws and the constitution with wanton 
licence, Socrates, till finally it overthrows @ all things 
public and private.” “Well,” said I, “are these 
things so?” “I think so,”’ he said. “ Then, as we 
were saying ® in the beginning, our youth must join 
in a more law-abiding play, since, if play grows law- 
less and the children likewise, it is impossible that 
they should grow up to be men of serious temper and 
lawful spirit.” “ Of course,” he said. “‘ And so we 
may reason that when children in their earliest play 
are imbued with the spirit of law and order through 
their music, the opposite of the former supposition 
happens—this spirit waits upon them in all things and 
fosters their growth, and restores and sets up again 
whatever was overthrown in the other“ type of state.” 
“True, indeed,” he said. “‘ Then such men redis- 
cover for themselves those seemingly trifling conven- 
tions which their predecessors abolished altogether.” 
“Of what sort?” ‘Such things as the becoming 
silence 4 of the young in the presence of their elders ; 
the Ene plese to them and rising up before them, 
and dutiful service of parents, and the cut of the 
hair * and the garments and the fashion of the foot- 
gear, and in general the deportment of the body and 
everything of the kind. Don’t you think so?” 
“JT do.” “ Yet to enact them into laws would, I 
think, be silly’ For such laws are not obeyed nor 
would they last, being enacted only in words and on 

* Cf. on 412 B, Isoc. Areopagit. 41, and Laws 788 B, 
where the further, still pertinent consideration is added that 
the multiplication of minor enactments tends to bring funda- 
mental laws into contempt. Cf. ‘Plato’s Laws and the 
Unity of Plato’s Thought,” p. 353, n. 2. 


ah = 


lds yap; Kwédvvever yotv, fv & éyd, & *Adei- 
favre, eK THs maidelas, Smo av Tis Opunon, 
Crowafira Kal Ta émoueva elvat. 7) odK adel TO 
o a“ o A / / \ 
Gpowov Ov opowv mapaxadet; Ti pyv; Kal re- 
Aevtdv 87, oluar, datwev av eis ev te Tédeov Kal 
veaviKov amofaivew avtTo 7 ayabov 7 Kal Todvay- 
ly / \ ” s > id > \ A / 
tiov. Ti yap ovK; 7 8 ds. “Eyw pev rtoivur, 
el7ov, dia tadta ovK av ert Ta ToOLAtTa ém- 
/ a > / > ” / , 
xXeipjoayu vopobereiv. Eixétws y’, edn. Ti dé, 
> A ~ »” A > ~ / 
® mpos Yedv, Ednv, Ta ayopaia EvuBodAaiwv te 
/ > > A a 3 A 3 /, 
mépt Kat’ ayopay exacTot & mpos adAAjAous Evp- 
; > \ 4 ‘ ~ \ 
D BadXAovow, «i dé BovdAer, Kal yevpotexviK@v mepl — 
EvpBoAaiwy Kal AowWopidv Kal aikias Kal duca@v — 
Anges’ Kat Suxaor@v Kataordoets, Kal et mov 
TeAdv Ties 7) mpd€ers 7) Odcers avayKatol eiow 7 
kat’ ayopas 7 Aévas, 7) Kal TO Tapdtray ayopa- 
vomiKa aTTa  aoTuvopiKa 7 €AAyweriKA 7 Coa 
dAXa tTowdra, TovTwy ToAuncomev TL vopoberety; 
> > ° ” ” > / a“ > a 
AX’ odK« afiov, éfn, avdedor Kadots Kayabois 
émitatrew: Ta TOAAA yap adT@v, doa det vopobeTy- 
Ecac$a, padiws mov etpjacovow. Nai, & dire, 
elzov, edv ye Oeds adrots 5:8 owrnpiay tav 

1 Anéews q: Angers others, 

@ Cf. 401 c, Demosth. Olynth. iii. 33 réXevdv 7 Kal péya. 

» ra roaira is slightly contemptuous. Specific commercial, 
industrial and criminal legislation was not compatible with 
the plan of the Republic, and so Plato omits it here. Much 
of it is given in the Laws, but even there details are left to 
the citizens and their rulers. Cf. supra on 412 B. 

¢ Of. Laws 922 a, Aristot. Pol. 1263 b 21. All legal 
relations of contract, implied contract and tort. 

4 In Laws 920 p Plato allows a dixn dredods duodoyias against 



paper.” “How could they?” “At any rate, 
Adeimantus,” I said, “ the direction of the education 
from whence one starts is likely to determine the 
quality of what follows. Does not like ever summon 
like?” “Surely.” ‘And the. final? outcome, I 
presume, we would say is one complete and vigorous 
product of good or the reverse.’ “* Of course,” said 
he. “ For my part, then,” I said, “ for these reasons 
I would not go on to try to legislate on such 
matters.”” “With good reason,” said he. “ But what, 
in heaven’s name,” said I, “ about business matters, 
the deals* that men make with one another in the 
agora—and, if you please, contracts with workmen ? 
and actions for foul language? and assault, the filing of 
declarations, the impanelling of juries, the payment 
and exaction of any dues that may be needful in 
markets or harbours and in general market, police or 
harbour regulations and the like, can we bring’ our- 
selves to legislate about these?” “ Nay, ’twould not 
be fitting,” he said, “‘to dictate to good and honour- 
able men.” For most of the enactments that are 
needed about these things they will easily, I presume, 
discover.” ““Yes,my friend, provided God grants them 
the preservation of the principles of law that we have 
——— or contractors who break or fail to complete con- 

* Cf. Laws 935 c. There was no dodopias dixn under that 
name at Athens, but certain words were actionable, adwéppnra, 
and there was a dixn xaxryoplas. 

* Plato shows his contempt for the subject by this confused 
enumeration, passing without warning from contracts and 
torts to pr ure and then to taxes, market, harbour and 
police regulations. 

9 ro\unoouev is both “‘ venture’ and ‘‘ deign.”’ 

* Cf. Isoc. Panegyr. 78 drt rots kadois KayaGots Tov dvOpwmrwv 
ovdev Oejoet TONGY ypaypdarwr. 

VOL. I Zz 337 

vopnwv av eumpoobev SuyjrAPopev. Ei 8€ py ye, 

8S ds, 7oAAa Tovabra Tigwevor del Kal erravopbov- 
‘ / / 7 > t4 
pevor TOV Biov dvaTeA€covow, oidpevor emdAjypeaBan 
Tob BeAtiorov. Aéyes, edn eyo, Budcecbar Tovds 
ToovTous WworTep Tovs KdpvovTds TE Kal ovK 
20 £n, ec ‘ > A , > ~ lol PS) / 
eGédovras b70 aKodacias exPivat movnpas Siairys. 
426 IIdvu pev odv. Kai piv obtrol ye yaprevtws 
diareAodow. latpevduevor yap ovdév trepaivovot, 
mAjv ye moutAwrepa Kat peilw mrovwodor Ta vO- 
onuata, Kal del eAmilovres, eav tis PdpyaKov 
/, e \ / 4 ig ~ / 
EvpBovrevon, bd TovToU eveoba bycets. Tdvu 
yap, épn, TOV otTw KapvovTwv Ta ToLabTa 7daOy. 
Ti 3 A 8° 2 ae 58 999 ? / ‘ 
é 6€; Hv ey: rode attadv od xapiev, TO 
/, wv ¢ a \ > ~ / 
mavtwy exfiotov wyeiobar tov tadnby Héyovra, 
Ort ply av peOdwv Kal eéumumAduevos Kal adpods- 
Bodlwv Kal dpy@v mavonrar, ore ddppwaka ovre 
Kavoeis ovTe Toual odd’ ad émwdai adrov ovde 
/ 29O\ ” ~ , 29. ) 
meplanta ovde GAAo THv TovwvTwv ovdev oVyCEt; 
Od advu yxapiev, edn: TO yap TO ed A€yovte 
xareraivery odk exer ydpw. Od« exawerys el, 
ednv eyw, Ws €oixas, TOV ToLvovTwy avdpa@v. Ov 
pevror pa Aia. 

2 Cf. Emerson, ** Experience”: ‘* They wish to be saved 
from the mischiefs of their vices but not from their vices. 
Charity would be wasted on this poor waiting on the 
symptoms. A wise and hardy physician will say, ‘Come 
out of that’ as the first condition of advice.” 

> Tronical. Quite fanciful is Diimmler’s supposition 
(Kleine Schriften, i. p. 99) that this passage was meant as 
destructive criticism of Isocrates’ Panegyricus and that 
Antid. 62isareply. Plato is obviously thinking of practical 
politicians rather than of Isocrates. 

° why ye ete., is loosely elliptical, but emendations are 



already discussed.” “‘ Failing that,” said he, “ they 
will pass their lives multiplying such petty laws and 
amending them in the expectation of attaining what is 
best.” ‘You mean,” said I, “that the life of such 
citizens will resemble that of men who are sick, yet 
from intemperance are unwilling to abandon‘ their 
unwholesome regimen.” “ By all means.” “ And 
truly,” said I, “‘ these latter go on in a most charming” 
fashion. For with all their doctoring they accomplish 
nothing except to complicate and augment their 
maladies. And° they are always hoping that some 
one will recommend a panacea that will restore their 
health.” “ A perfect description,” he said, “ of the 
state of such invalids.” ‘ And isn’t this a charming 
trait in them, that they hate most in all the world him 
who tells them the truth that until a man stops drinking 
and gorging and wenching and idling, neither drugs ¢ 
nor cautery nor the knife, no, nor spells nor periapts ° 
nor anything of that kind will be of any avail?” 
“ Not altogether charming,” he said, “ for there is no 
or charm in being angry’ with him who speaks 
well.” “You do not seem to be an admirer?’ of 
such people,” said I. ‘‘ No, by heaven, I am not.” 

4 For the list cf. Pindar, Pyth. iii. 50-54. _ 083° ad em- 

hasizes the transition to superstitious remedies in which 

lato doesn’t really believe. Cf. his rationalizing interpreta- 
tion of érwéai, Charm. 157 a, Theaetet. 149 c. Laws 933 a-B 
is to be interpreted in the spirit of the observation in Selden’s 
Table Talk: “The law against witches does not prove that there 
bee any but it punishes the malice,” etc. [Demosthenes] 
xxv. 80 is sceptical. 

* Cf. any lexicon, Shakes. 1 Henry VI. v. iii. 2 “Now 
help, ye charming spells and periapts,” and Plutarch’s story 
of the women who hung them on Pericles’ neck on his 
death-bed. t Cf. 480 a, 354 a. 

¢ The noun is more forcible than the verb would be. Cf. 
Protag. 309 a éxawérys. a5 


V. O88 adv 7 mods dpa, dmep dptu edéyoper, 
6An Towdrov moun, odK emaweoe. 1%) OD daivov- 
Tat oor tavrov epydlecbar tovTos ta&v mdéAewv 
Goa. Kak@s todurevdpevat mpoayopevovar ots 
moAirais Ti ev KaTdoTacw THs mdéAews SAnY pI} 
Kweiv, Ws amolavovpevous, ds av TobTo Spa: ds 
8 av odds ottw modArevopevous ydioTa Oeparredn 
kal xapilnrar tbrotpéxywv Kal mpoyryywoKwy Tas 
agetepas PovdAnjoers Kal tavrtas dewdos 4 amo- 
mAnpodv, obros dpa ayads Te €oTat avijp Kal codos 
Ta peydra Kal Tiunoetar to of@v; Tadrov pev 
obv, edn, euovye Soxotar Spav, Kal odd émwartiodv 
erawa. Ti 8 ad rods Oédovras Depamevew Tas 
Tovavtas moAeis Kal mpoOvpovpevous odK ayacat 
Ths avdpelas te Kal edyepetas; "“Eywy’, dn, 
TAyv y doo eénnarynvra. tr” adbt@v Kai olovrat 
TH aAnbeia moAitiKol evar, Ste emrawodvTat dz0 
Tov modAdv. Ids Heyes; od ouvyyvyvdoKets, 

2 We return from the illustration to its application to the 

> Cf. 497 B, Aristot. Pol. 1301 b 11. Cf. the obvious 
imitation in the (probably spurious) Epistle vii. 330 x. 
For the thought, from the point of view of an enemy of 
democracy, cf. the statement in [Xen.] Rep. Ath. 3. 9, that 
the faults of Athens cannot be corrected while she remains a 
democracy. The Athenians naturally guarded their con- 
stitution and viewed with equal suspicion the idealistic re- 
former and the oligarchical reactionary. 

° Cf. supra, p. 65 note d, and Laws 9238. The phraseology 
here recalls Gorg. 517 3, Aristoph. Knights 46-63. ; 
**Plato’s Laws and the Unity of Plato’s Thought,” Class. 
Phil. vol. ix. (Oct. 1914) p. 363, n. 3. 

4 Almost technical, Cf. 538 B. 

© Here * serve,”’ not ‘‘ flatter.” 

? This word e’xépeca is often misunderstood by lexicons and 
commentators. It is of course not “ dexterity” (L. & S.) nor 



VY. “Neither then, if an entire city,? as we were 
just now saying, acts in this way, will it have your 
approval, or don’t you think that the way of such 
invalids is precisely that of those cities which being 
badly governed forewarn their citizens not to meddle? 
with the general constitution of the state, denouncing 
death to whosoever attempts that—while whoever 
most agreeably serves* them governed as they are and 
who curries favour with them by fawning upon them 
and anticipating their desires and by his cleverness in 
gratifying them, him they will account the good man, 
the man wise in worthwhile things,* the man they will 
delight tohonour?”’ “ Yes,” he said, “ I think their 
conduct is identical, and I don’t approve it in the very 
least.” “ And what again of those who are willing 
and eager to serve* such states? Don’t you admire 
their valiance and light-hearted irresponsibility ‘?” 
“I do,” he said, “ except those who are actually 
deluded and suppose themselves to be in truth 
statesmen? because they are praised by the many.” 
“What do you mean? Can’t you make allowances* 

yet probably “complaisance,” nor yet ‘“‘humanitas” or 
“Gutmiitigkeit,’ as Adam and Schneider think. It ex- 
presses rather the lightheartedness with which such politicians 
rush in where wiser men fear to tread, which is akin to the 
lightness with which men plunge intocrime. Cf. Laws 690 p 
Taw éri véuwr Bow lovrwy padlws and 969 a dvdpeératos. Plato’s 
political physician makes ** come out of that” a precondition 
of his treatment. Cf. Laws 736-737, Polit. 299 a-n, infra 
501 a, 540 ©, Epistle vii. 330 c-p, and the story in Aelian, 
V.H. ii. 42, of Plato’s refusal to legislate for the Arcadians 
because they would not accept an equalization of property. 
vd Cf. Euthyphro 2 c-p, Gorg. 513 8, Polit. 275 c and 
* Plato often condescendingly and half ironically pardons 
“shed. pew | inevitable errors. Cf. 366 c, Phaedr. 269 3, 
uthydem. 306 c. 



nv 8 éyd, rots avdpaow; 7 ole ofdv 7 elvas 
avdpt pn emuoTrapéevm pretpeiv, Erépwv TovovTwv 
TOoMAav AcyovTwy Sti TeTpamnXds eoTW, adToV 
tadra py Hyetobar epi atrod; OdK« ad, edn, 
todTd ye. Mi) roivuy yaddmawe: Kal yap mov 
elor mavTwY xapieoTaToL Of ToLodToL, vopobeTobv- 
Tés Te ofa apt dujAPopev Kal emavopbobvres aet 
oldpevol TL Tépas evpyjoew mepl Ta Ev Tots Evp- 
Bodaious Kakovpynpara Kat mept a viv 87 eya 
eAeyov, ayvoodvres Ott TH Ovte. woTep “Ydpav 
téuvovow. Kat pyr, edn, od« addo ti ye Trowotow. 
"Ey peév toivuv, qv 8 éyd, to Tovwdrov eldos 
vow mépt Kal moAuTelas ovr’ €v KaKas OT’ ev ed 
modirevomeryn mrdAce w@pnv av Seiy tov adAnOwov 
vopobérny mpaypnarevecOan, ev TH mev Ste avadeAF 
Kat 7Aéov obdev, év dé TH, OTL Ta pev adTa@Y Kav 
doTiaobv etpor, Ta Sé OTL avTopaTa Eemetow eK 
TOV éurrpoobev emitndevpdtwv. 

B_ Ti odv, &dn, ere av tiv Aowrov THs vopobecias 

” ee A id ¢ ~ \ > / ~ , 
ein; Kal éyw elzov ore ‘Hyiv pev odd€v, T@ pevtou 
’AmdAAwve 7@ ev AcAdois ra Te wéyvora KalkdAdora 
Kal mpa@ta Tav vopolernpatwv. Ta zoia; 4 8’ ds. 

@ For otk a’ ef. 393 p, 442 a, Theaetet. 161 a, Class. Phil. 
vol. xxiii. pp. 285-287. éywye above concurs with dyacat, 
ignoring the irony. wAj ye etc. marks dissent on one 
point. This dissent is challenged, and is withdrawn by 
ovk ad... TOUTS ye (oluat). 

* +@ évre points the application of the proverbial fédpav 
réuvew, which appears in its now trite metaphorical use for 
the first time here and in Huthydem. 297 c. Cf. my note on 
Horace iv. 4. 61. For the thought cf. Isoc. vii. 40, Macrob. 
Sat. ii. 13 “‘leges bonae ex malis moribus procreantur,” 
Arcesilaus apud Stob. Flor, xliii. 91 ofr 6h Kal Gov vépot 



forthemen? Do you think it possible for a man who 
does not know how to measure when a multitude of 
others equally ignorant assure him that he is four 
cubits tall not to suppose this to be the fact about 
himself?” “ Why no,*”’ he said, “I don’t think 
that.” ‘‘ Then don’t be harsh with them. For surely 
such fellows are the most charming spectacle in the 
world when they enact and amend such laws as we 
just now described and are perpetually expecting to 
find a way of putting an end to frauds in business and 
in the other matters of which I was speaking because 
they can’t see that they are in very truth? trying to 
cut off a Hydra’s head.” “ Indeed,” he said, “ that 
is exactly what they are doing.” “I, then,” said I, 
“ should not have supposed ¢ that the true lawgiver 
ought to work out matters of that kind? in the lawsand 
the constitution of either an ill-governed or a well- 
governed state—in the one because they are useless 
_ and accomplish nothing, in the other because some of 
them anybody could discover and others will result 
spontaneously from the pursuits already described.” 
* What part of legislation, then,” he said, “ is still 
left for us?” And I replied, “ For us nothing, but 
for the Apollo of Delphi, the chief, the fairest and the 
first of enactments.” ‘“‘ What are they?” he said. 

mhetoro éxe? xai détxiay elvat ueyistny, Theophrastus apud 
Stob. Flor. xxxvii. 21 d\-ywr of dya8ol vépwv déorrat. 

* Tronically, “I should not have supposed, but for the 
practice of our politicians.” 

* ciéos viuwy wép is here a mere periphrasis, though the 
true classification of laws was a topic of the day. CY. 
Laws 630 e, Aristot. Pol. 1267 b 37. Plato is not always 
careful to mark the distinction between the legislation 
which he rejects altogether and that which he leaves to the 
discretion of the citizens. 



‘lep@v re iSptceis Kai Pvoiar Kal ddAa Oedy te 
kal Saidvwv Kal ypwwv Oepareiar. teAevTHody- 
twv te’ ad OfKat Kal doa Tots exe? Set darnpe- 
todvras tAews adrods éyew. Ta yap 51) Toadra 

C otr’ emordueba typets oikilovrés te moAW oddevi 
adAw rrevodpucba, eav vodv Eywpev, odd€ xpnoducba 
eEnynth aAX 7 7O Tatpiw. obtos yap Sirov 
6 Yeds mepi Ta ToradTa macw avOpamois maTpLos 
eEnyntis ev weow THs yas emt Tod dudadod Kad- 
nuevos eEnyeira. Kat xadds y’, dn, Aéyets* Kal 

/ a 
TownTéov OUT. 

D VI. ?Quxvopévn ev toiver, jv 8 eye, 78n av 
got ein, @ mat “Apiotwvos, 7) 70Aus* TO Se 87) peta 
TobrTo oKkdme. ev atti das obey mropicdmevos — 
ixavov avtos Te Kal Tov adeAdov tapaKdAe Kal 
TloAduapxov Kai tods dAdous, edv mms idwpev, 70d 
mot av ein 7) Suxavoovvn Kal 70d 7 aduKia, Kal Ti 

@ éxet=in the other world. So often. 

> For the exegete as a special religious functionary at 
Athens ef. L. & S. s.v. and Laws 759 c-p. Apollo in a 
higher sense is the interpreter of religion for all mankind. 
He is technically rarpgos at Athens (Huthydem. 302 pv) but 
he is rdrpios for all Greeks and all men. Plato does not, as 
Thiimser says (p. 301), confuse the Dorian and the Ionian 
Apollo, but rises above the distinction. 

¢ Plato prudently or piously leaves the details of cere- 
monial and institutional religion to Delphi. Cf. 540 B-c, 
Laws 759 c, 738 B-c, 828 A, 856 £, 865 B, 914 a, 947 D. 

4 This * navel’’ stone, supposed to mark the centre of the 
earth, has now been found. Cf. Poulsen’s Delphi, pp. 19, 
29, 157, and Frazer on Pausanias x. 16. 

@ Not the dvayxacordrn 7éXs of 369 £, nor the dd\eypalvovca 
mods of 372 £, but the purified city of 399 = has now been 
established and described. The search for justice that follows 
formulates for the first time the doctrine of the four cardinal 
virtues and defines each provisionally and sufficiently for the 



“ The founding of temples, and sacrifices, and other 
forms of worship of gods, daemons, and heroes ; and 
likewise the burial of the dead and the services we 
must render to the dwellers in the world beyond? to 
keep them gracious. For of such matters we neither 
know anything nor in the founding of our city if we 
are wise shall we entrust them to any other or make 
use of any other interpreter? than the God of our 
fathers. For this God surely is in such matters for 
all mankind the interpreter of the religion of their 
fathers who from his seat in the middle and at the 
very navel @ of the earth delivers his interpretation.” 
“Excellently said,” he replied ; “and that is what we 
must do.” 

VI. “ Atlast,then,sonof Ariston,” said I, “yourcity® 
may be considered as established. The next thing is to 
procure a sufficient light somewhere and to look your- 
self and call in the aid of your brother and of Polem- 
archus and the rest, if we may in any wise discover 
_where justice and injustice? should be in it, wherein 

present purpose, and solves the problems dramatically pre- 
sented in the minor dialogues, Charmides, Laches, etc. Cf. 
Unity of Plato’s Thought, pp. 15-18, nn. 81-102, and the 
introduction to the second volume of this translation. 

? abrés te xai: ef. 398 a. 

# See on 369 a. Matter-of-fact critics may object that there 
is no injustice in the perfectly state. But we know 
the bad best by the canon of the good. Cf. on 409 a-s. 
The knowledge of opposites is the same. 

Injustice can be defined only in relation to its opposite 
(444 -z), and in the final argument the most unjust man 
and state are set up as the extreme anti of the ideal 
(571-580). By the perfect state Plato does not mean a 
state in which no individual retains any human imperfections. 

It is idle then to speak of “ difficulties” or “ contradic- 
tions’ or changes of plan in the composition of the Republic. 



dA Aow duvadhéperov, Kal mOTEpov Set KexTHoOae 
TOV péMovra evdaipova elvan, € edv te AavOdvn édv 
TE 1) mavras Beovs Te Kat dvOpesrrous. Oddev 
Aéyets, edn 6 6 PAavnwv: od yap dréaxou Cyrijcev, 
Eg ws ovx GaLdv oou ov py) od Bonbety Suxaroodvy 
els Sdvapuy mavrt TpoTTw. “AAn OH, Eby € ey, bm0~ 
LywvnoKes, Kal Trowntéov prev ye ove, xp?) be Kal 
bas fuMapBavew. ‘AM, €bn, TrOUTOpLEY ovTw. 
*EArives Toivuv, jv 8 eyes, edprjoew aire de, 
oluar Hiv thy mddAw, etzrep dp0Bs ye @KvoTar, 
Ted€ws adyadiy elvar. “Avayrn, ey. AjjAov 5 
ott cody 7 €oTl Kal dvBpeta Kal cuppa Kat 
Sucaia. AjjAov. OdxKodv 6 Tt dy adT@v «vpwyev 
ev airh, TO brrddourov €oTat TO ovx edpycevov ; 
428 Ti pay; “Qomep toivuv dw Twa Terrdpav, 
el ev Tt elntodpev abrav ev drwoby, | ondre 
mp@rov éxeivo eyvapey, ixav@s av clyev. jy, el 
be Ta Tpla mporepov eyvwpicaper, avT@ dv ToUTw 
eyvapiato To Cntrovpevov: SHAov yap ott ovK dio 

* For édy re. . . édv re of. 367 E, 

> Cf. supra 331 5. Emphatic as in 449 p-450 a, Phaedo 
95 a, and Alcib. I. 135 pv. 

© Of. 368 B-c. 

4 Cf. 434 8, 449 a. This in a sense begs the original 
question in controversy with Thrasymachus, by the assum 
tion that justice and the other moral virtues are goods. Cf. 
Gorg. 507 c. See The Idea of Good in Plato’s Republic, p. 205. 
For the cardinal virtues cf. Schmidt, Ethik der Griechen, i. 
p. 304, Pearson, Fragments of Zeno and Cleanthes, pp. 173 f., 
and commentators on Pindar, Nem. iii. 74, which seems to 
refer to four periods of human life, and Xen. Mem. iii. 9. 
1-5, and iv. 6. 1-12. 

Plato recognizes other virtues even in the Republic (supra 
402 c éXevdepirns and weyahorpérea, Cf. 536 a), and would 
have been as ready to admit that the number four was a 



they differ from one another and which of the two he 
must have who is to be happy, alike * whether his 
condition is known or not known to all gods and men.” 
“ Nonsense,” said Glaucon, “ you? promised that you 
would carry on the search yourself, admitting that 
it would be impious ¢ for you not to come to the aid of 
justice by every means in your power.” “A true 
reminder,” I said, ‘‘ and I must do so, but you also 
must lend a hand.” “ Well,” he said, “ we will.” 
“ T expect then,” said I, “ that we shall find it in this 
way. I think our city, if it has been rightly founded, 
is good in the full sense of the word.” “‘ Necessarily,” 
he said. “Clearly, then, it will be wise, brave, sober, 
and just.” “Clearly.” “Then if we find any of 
these qualities in it, the remainder? will be that which 
we have not found?” “Surely.” “‘ Take the case 
of any four other things. If we were looking for any 
one of them in anything and recognized the object 
of our search first, that would have been enough for 
us, but if we had recognized the other three first, 
that in itself would have made known to us the thing 
we were seeking. For plainly there was nothing 
part of his literary machinery as Ruskin was to confess the 
arbitrariness of his Seven Lamps of Architecture. 

* It is pedantry to identify this with Mill’s method of 
residues and then comment on the primitive naiveté of such 
an application of Logie to ethics. One might as well speak 
of Andocides’ employment of the method (De myst. 109) or 
of its use by Gorgias in the disjunctive dilemma of the 
Palamedes 11 and passim, or say that the dog of the anec- 
dote employs it when he sniffs at one trail and immediately 
runs up the other. Plato obviously employs it merely as a 
literary device for the presentation of his material under the 

re of asearch. He, “in the infancy of philosophy,” is 
quite as well aware as his censors can be in the senility of 
criticism that he is not proving anything by this method, but 
merely setting forth what he has assumed for other reasons. 



€rt tv 1) TO vrodadbév. "OpOds, Edn, A€yets. 
Otxoiv Kai mepi tovtwv, ered) TérTapa dvTa 
/ ¢ , / cond / ‘ \ 
Tuyxdvet, waavtws Cytntéov; Ada 54. Kai pev 
B 81) ap@rdv yé pou Soxet ev adt@ KatadnAov elvar 
7 codias Kal Tu dromov wept adryy daivera. Ti; 
7S Os. Lodr péev TO Gvee Soxe? pro H 7dAus elvae 
8 5AO * v Ar / > he N / K \ \ 
qv dunAPopev: evBovdros yap. odxi; Nai. Kat pay 
TOOTS ye adTo, 7 evBovAia, SHAov OT emvaTHuN Tis 
eoTw: od ydp mov dyabia ye aA emornun «d 
Bovredvovrar. AArov. TloAAat 8€ ye Kai mavto- 
Samat emorqua ev TH ode ciciv. Ids yap ov; 
> > ~ AY 
Ap’ obv dua tiv tev TexTOvwv emLoTHuNY Go 
C kat evBovdros 7 modus mpoapnréa; Ovddapds, edn, 
dud ye tavTnv, GdAa TexTovKyH. OdK dpa dua THY 
bmép TOV Evdivwv cKevdv emraTHunv, BovAevopevy,* 
¢ ”“ ” / \ / /, > 
ws av éxyou BéAtiota, aodi) KAntéa modus. Od 
pevror. Ti dé; tiv trép t&v ex Tod xadKod 7 
” ~ 4 29? ¢ ~ w 
Twa addAAnv tv TowotTwr; Odds’ Avrwobv, ey. 
Ovdse tiv brép Tob Kapmod Tis yevéoews EK THs 
1 Bovdevouérn codd.: Bovevouevyy Heindorf. 

* copia is wisdom par excellence. Aristotle, Met. i., traces 
the history of the idea from Homer to its identification in 
Aristotle’s mind with first philosophy or metaphysics. For 
Plato, the moralist, it is virtue and the fear of the Lord; for 
his political theory it is the ‘political or royal art” which 
the dramatic dialogues fail to distinguish from the special 
sciences and arts. Cf. Unity of Plato’s Thought, p. 17, 
n. 97, Protag. 319 a, Huthyd. 282 £, 291 c, Gorg. 501 a-s, ete. 

In the unreformed Greek state its counterfeit counterpart 
is the art of the politician. 

In the Republic its reality will be found in the selected 
guardians who are to receive the higher education, and who 
alone will apprehend the idea of good, which is not mentioned 
here simply because Plato, not Krohn, is writing the 



lca dis 3S 


left for it to be but the remainder.” “ Right,” he 
said. ‘‘ And so, since these are four, we must 
conduct the search in the same way.” “Clearly.” 
“ And, moreover, the first thing that I think I clearly 
see therein is the wisdom,’ and there is something 
odd about that, it appears.” “What?” said he. 
“Wise in very deed I think the city that we have 
described is, for it is well counselled, is it not?” 
“Yes.” “And surely this very thing, good counsel,’ 
is a form of wisdom. For it is not by ignorance but 
by knowledge that men counsel well.’”’ ‘‘ Obviously.” 
“ But there are many and manifold knowledges or 
sciences in the city.” “Of course.” “Is it then 
owing to the science of her carpenters that a city is 
to be called wise and well advised?” “‘ By no means 
for that, but rather mistress of the arts of building.” 
“ Then a city is not to be styled wise because of the 
deliberations ° of the science of wooden utensils for 
their best production?” ‘No, I grant you.” “Is 
it, then, because of that of brass implements or any 
other of that kind?” ‘“‘ None whatsoever,” he said. 
“Nor yet because of the science of the production 
of crops from the soil, but the name it takes from that 

* Protagoras, like Isocrates, professed to teach e’fSovNa 
(Protag. 318 £), which Socrates at once identifies with the 
political art. Plato would accept Protagoras’s discrimination 
of this from the special arts (ibid. 318 & ff.), but he does not 
believe that such as Protagoras can teach it. His political art 
is a very different thing from Protagoras’s e/SovNa and is ap- 

rehended by a very different education from that offered by 
rotagoras. Cf. *‘ Plato’s Laws and the Unity of Plato’s 
Thought,” p. 348, n. 5, Huthydem. 291 B-c, Charm. 170 B, 
Protag. 319 a, Gorg. 501 a-B, 503 p, Polit. 289 c, 293 p, 309 c. 
© BovNevouévn: Heindorf’s BSovXevouévny is perhaps sup- 
ported by 7. . . Bovdevderar below, but in view of Plato’s 
colloquial anacoluthic style is unnecessary. 




S; ada yewpyery. Aoxet Hot. Ti 8é; jy 6 
Bid €or TIS /emvor npn ev TH dipre bd’ Typav 
oixrabeton mapa Tot TOV mroAurv a ovdx bmp TOV 
év TH monet Twos BovAcverat, aAN’ dmrep eauris éAqs, 
ovtw"™ av TpOrrov adT) Te Tpos adTHV Kal Tpos TAS 
aAAas 70 Aeus dpiora optrot; “Eore HEVTOL. Tis, 
epny € £Y8, Kal ev Tiow; Atrn, uP & ds, } dudakicy 
Kat €v TovTos Tots dpyovow, ods viv E Tehéous 
pvAakas wvoudlouev. Ava tadrnv obv thy em- 
oTHpnv ti tiv mdAw mpocayopevers; EvBovdov, 
épn, Kal T@ dvti aodyv. Ildrepov ody, Hv 8 eye, 
€v TH Tove oler Huiv yadKéas mAclovs evécecbar 
 Tovs adAnbwods dvAakas TovTous; IloAv, dy, 
xaAxéas. Od«odr, édynv, Kal tv dAdwv, dcot 
emOTH LAS exovres dvopdlovrat ties elvat, TaVTWY 
TovTwy ovToL av elev OAiyeorous TloAv ve. Té 
opixpoTdtw dpa €Over Kal péper EavTis Kat TH ev 
ToUTW emLoTHUN, TH TMpoeaTart Kal apxovTt, GAy 
cody adv ein Kata vow oikicbetoa mAs Kat 
TobT0, ws Eoue, puoet odiyearov ylyverat yevos, @ 
Mmpoonker TaUTNS Ths emor HLS perahayxavew, 
nv povnyv de trav ddAwy emornpdrv copia 
KaAreiobar. *"AdAnbéorara, én, rEyets. Todro pev 
57) €v tev TeTTdpwv ovK olda dvTWa TpdmoV 
evpyjkapev adto Te Kal Omou THs ToAEws ipuTat. 
*Epol yotv Soxet, edn, amoxypwvtws etpiabar. 

VII. *AMa piv avdpeta ye adry te Kal ev @ 

1 gyrw’ dv Ast’s conjecture: évrwa codd. 

# Cf. on 416 c. 
> Of. Protag. 311 & ri dvoua Gddo ye Aeysuevor mepl Ipwr- 



is agricultural.” “I think so.” “Then,” said I, 
“is there any science in the city just founded by us 
residing in any of its citizens which does not take 
counsel about some particular thing in the city but 
about the city as a whole and the betterment of its 
relations with itself* and other states?” “ Why, 
yes, there is.” “‘ What is it,” said I, “ and in whom 
is it found?” “It is the science of guardianship 
or government and it is to be found in those rulers to 
whom we just now gave the name of guardians in the 
full sense of the word.” “‘ And what term then do 
you apply to the city because of this knowledge ? ” 
“Well advised,” he said, “ and truly wise.” ‘* Which 
class, then,” said I; “ do you suppose will be the more 
numerous in our city, the smiths or these true 
guardians?” “ The smiths, by far,” he said. “And 
would not these rulers be the smallest of all the groups 
of those who possess special knowledge and receive 
distinctive appellations??” “By far.” “Thenitis by 
virtue of its smallest class and minutest part of itself, 
and the wisdom that resides therein, in the part which 
takes the lead and rules, that a city established on 
principles of nature would be wise as a whole. And 
as it appears these are by nature the fewest, the class 
to which it pertains to partake of the knowledge 
which alone of all forms of knowledge deserves the 
name of wisdom.” ‘“‘ Most true,” he said. ‘“‘ This 
one of our four, then, we have, I know not how, dis- 
covered, the thing itself and its place in the state.” 
“I certainly think,” said he, “ that it has been dis- 
covered sufficiently.” 

VII. “ But again there is no difficulty in seeing 

aybpov dxotouerv; Gowep wept Decdiov dyahuarorody xal rept 

> ‘Ophpou ronriy. 



~ “a 5A 8 7 «a 4 r / 3 5X 
keitat Tis 7oAews, uv 6 rovadry KAnTéa % TdABs, 
od mdvu xaderov idetv. [lds 84; Tis dv, fv & 
> > 
Beyw, eis ddAo te aroPAdbas 7 Sedjy 7) avdpetav 
/, ” > 7” > ~ ‘ / “A a 
76dw elrou, GAN’ 7) eis TobTO TO pepos, 6 mpoTroAcuet 
TE Kal oTpareverar brép adtns; OvS’ dv efs, Edn, 
eis dAAo tt. Od yap oluat, elzov, of ye aAAou ev 
ee ee | A ” > a 4 9 nn ” 
adth 7 Sedo 7 avdpetou dvres KUpior av elev 7 
/ 7 pees! bal / > 4 > 2 / 
rotav adtny elvar 7 Tolav. Od yap. Kai avdpeia 
dpa 7éds pwéper TwWt éavTis eori, dia Td ev exeivw 
exew Sdvayw To.adrnv, 7 dua TavTos owoer THY 
C repli Tdv Sewdv Sdéav, tabra te adra elvar Kal 
Towatra, ad Te Kat ola 6 vowobéerns mapiyyyeiAev ev 
~ , x“ > ~ > / al > 
Th Taela. 4 OD Tobro avdpeiav Kadreis; Od 
mavu, epn, euabor 6 eles, GAN abfs cine. Lwrn- 
play éywy’, elzov, Aéyw twa elvar Tv avdpeiav. 
, A , \ ~ 4 onl € A 
Ilotav 81) owrnpiav; Thy ris d50&ns ths to 
vopov bia THs madelas yeyovulas Trept TOV Sewr, 
A a . ‘ \ \ A ” > \ 
a Té €ott Kai ola. Sia mavros de eAeyov adriy* 
/ A ” / ” / 
owrnpiav to & Te Avmas dvTa Siacwlecbat 
wih Ce ee ¢ a Wits > , Us 
D airy’ Kat ev Adovais Kal ev émiupiats Kat ev 
doBows Kat pun ekBaddrew. @ Sé por SoKet dpotov 

1 airiv codd.: Adam unnecessarily avrfjs. 

4 ro.aitn =such, that is, brave. The courage of a state, 
qua such, also resides in a small class, the warriors. 
> dvdpeta bvres: the ab urbe condita construction. Cf. supra 

421 a. 
© rolav . . . 9 tolav: cf. 437 ©, Phaedr, 271 v, Laws 721 B. 



bravery itself and the part of the city in which it 
resides for which the city is called brave.*” “‘ How 
so?” “ Who,” said I, “in calling a city cowardly 
or brave would fix his eyes on any other part of it 
than that which defends it and wages war in its 
behalf?”’ “‘ No one at all,” he said. ‘‘ For the 
reason, I take it,” said I, “ that the cowardice or the 
bravery ° of the other inhabitants does not determine 
for it the one quality or the other.°” “‘ It does not.” 
“ Bravery too, then, belongs to a city by virtue of a 
part of itself owing to its possession in that part of a 
quality that under all conditions will preserve. the 
conviction that things to be feared are precisely those 
which and such as the lawgiver? inculcated in their 
education. Is not that what you call bravery?” 
“‘T don’t altogether understand ¢ what you said,” he 
replied; ‘‘but say it again.” “‘ A kind of conservation,” 
I said, “is what I mean by bravery.” “‘ What sort 
of aconservation’?” “The conservation of the con- 
viction which the law has created by education about 
fearful things—what and what sort of things are to 
be feared. And by the phrase‘ under all conditions?’ I 
mean that the brave man preserves it both in pain 
and pleasures and in desires and fears and does not 
expel” it from his soul. And I may illustrate it by a 

@ Cf. 442 c, Aristot. Eth. Nic. 1129 b 19 rpocrdrra & 6 
véuos kai Ta TOU avdpeiou Epya Toteiv, 

¢ Cf. supra on 347 a. 

4 cwrnplay is the genus; Phileb. 34 a, Def. Plat. 412 a-s, 
Hence voiavy as often in the minor dialogues sometimes 
with a play on its idiomatic, contemptuous meaning. Cf. 
Laches 194 v. 

9 In the Laches 191 p-£, and the Laws 633 p also, Plato 
generalizes courage to include resistance to the lure of 

» Cf. supra 412 &, 

VOL. I 2A 353 


elvar, eOéAw arrevxdoa, «¢ BovrAa. *AAAAG Bov- 
>’ ~ >, 2 4 a < cal 
Aopar. Odxodv olcba, jv 8 éeyw, btu of Badeis, 
> \ A 4 ” 4 > c ul 
erredav BovdAnbaar Baisar épia dor’ elvar ddoupyd, 
mp@tov pev exAéyovtar €k Toco’Twy xpwydtwv 
piav dvow tHv TOV AevKdV, EmevTa mpoTapa- 
oxevdlovow ovK oAlyn mapacKevH Oepamevoav- 
Tes, Omws Sé€erar Oo TL padvora TO avOos, Kat 
E odtw 87) Barrovou Kat 6 pev av todtw TH TpOTw 
Bad, Sevooro.ov yiyverar To Bader, kai » mAvous 
oT avev puppatwy ovte peta pumpatwv Sdvarat 
> ~ . ae > a a 7” , 
adrav To avOos adapetoba: a S’ av pH, oloba ofa 
57) ylyverat, éedv té tis ddAa xpmpata Banry 
éav Te Kal Tadra put) mpobepamedcas. Oida, edn, 
6tt €xtAvta Kat yedoia. Tovotrov roivuv, hv 3 
> / € / A 4 > 4 A c a 
ey, drdAaBe Kata Svvayw epydlecbar Kal yuas, 
ote e€eAceyopeba Tods oTpatudtas Kal éadevouev 
430 fovotkh Kal yupvaorixh’ pndev otov dAdo pnya- 
vacbar, 7 Omws piv o Tt KdAACTA TovS VvomLoUsS 
mevabevtes SéEowrTo worep Badjy, iva Sevaorotds 
adtav 4 Sdfa ylyvoiro Kat wept dewdv Kal wept 
tav ddAwy, da TO TH Te ddow Kal THY TpodHy 
emiTndetay €oxnKkeval, Kai un adtT@v exmAdvar THY 

® The moral training of the guardians is likened to the 
dyeing of selected white wools with fast colours. Cf. Aristot. 
Eth, Nic. 1105 a 2, Mare. Aurel. iii. 4. 3 dicatoctvy BeBappmévov 
eis B400s, Sir Thomas Browne, Christian Morals, i. 9 * Be 
what thou virtuously art, and let not the ocean wash away thy 
tincture."’ The idea that the underlying substance must be 
of neutral quality may have been suggested to Plato by 
Anaxagoras. It occurs in the Timaeus 50 p-r, whence it 
passed to Aristotle’s psychology and Lucretius. Cf. my 
paper on ** Plato, Epicurus and Lucretius,’’ Harvard Studies, 
vol. xii. p. 204, 



similitude ? if you please.” ‘“‘Ido.”” “ You are aware 
that dyers when they wish to dye wool so as to hold 
the purple hue begin by selecting from the many 
colours there be the one nature of the white and then 
give it a careful preparatory treatment so that it will 
take the hue in the best way, and after the treat- 
ment,” then and then only, dip it in the dye. And 
things that are dyed by this process become fast- 
coloured ® and washing either with or without lyes 
cannot take away the sheen of their hues. But 
otherwise you know what happens to them, whether 2 
anyone dips other colours or even these without the 
preparatory treatment.” “‘ I know,” he said, “ that 
they present a ridiculous and washed-out appearance. 
“ By this analogy, then,” said I, “‘ you must conceive 
what we too to the best of our ability were doing 
when we selected our soldiers and educated them in 
music® and exercises of the body. The sole aim of our 
contrivance was that they should be convinced and re- 
ceive our laws like a dye as it were, so that their belief 
and faith might be/ fast-coloured both about the things 
that are to be feared and all other things because 
of the fitness of their nature and nurture, and that so 
their dyes might not be washed out by those lyes 

> For the technique cf. Bliimner, Technologie, vol. i. pp. 
227 ff. The Gepdrevois. seems to be virtually identical with 
the wporapackev7j, so that the aorist seems inappropriate, 
unless with Adam's earlier edition we transpose it immedi- 
ately before oirw 57. 

© For devoorods cf. L. & S., and Nauck, ’Adéorora 441 
rots devcoTro.ots PapudKos EavOlferar. 

# The two points of precaution are (1) to select white wool, 
not &\\a xpwpuara, (2) to prepare by treatment even this. 

* Cf. 522 a, Phileb. 17 B. 

1 yiyvoro is process ; éxrAvva: (aorist) is a single event (47). 



Badny Ta pppata Tatra, Sewa dvra exxdAdleu, 
% Te 7d0v7, mavTos _XaAeorpaiov Seworépa obca 
B robro Sdpav Kal Kovias, Ava TE Kat poBos Kat 
emiOupia, mavTos dAAov pupparos. THY 57) Tovad- 
THY Svvapiuv Kal owrnpiay did mavros dd€ns Spbijs 
TE Kal vopLiLov Sewav mépl Kal 147) avdpelav eywye 
Kare Kal TiBewar, el py) TL OD d\Ao Aéyets. "AMV 
obdev, 4 3° ds, Acyen. Soxeis yap pou THY dp Biv 
dofav _Tepl Tay avTav TOUTWN avev Tauetas 
yeyovuiar, Thy Te Onpwwdyn Kat dvdpamodadn, oure 
mavu vopyrov" jy<tcba, aAXo TE Tt 7 dvdpetav 
C xadeiv. "AAnbeorara, hv & eyd, dé€yeus. ‘Amo- 
déyouar toivuy Todo avdpetav elvac. Kat yap 
amodexou, Hv & eyw, moditiucyy ye, Kal dps 
amodeer adlis 5é€ wept adrob, eav BovAn, ert 
KdAMov Siev. viv yap od Todro elnrodpev, adda 
Suxarocvvynv: mpos obv Thy eKeivov Cyrnow, ws 
ey@par, ixavads exer. “AdAa cards, epn, rAéyets. 
D VIII. Avo pj, fv 8 eyd, ert Aowrd, a Set 
Katey ev TH TdAEL, TE GwWppocdvyn Kat od 87) 
1 youmov codd.: pudviuov Stob. Flor. xliii. 97. 

@ Seva: it is not fanciful to feel the unity of Plato’s im- 
agination as well as of his thought in the recurrence of this 
word in the dewd xai dvayxaia . . . waOjpara of the mortal 
soul in Tim. 69 c, 

®’ Cf. Protag. 360 c-p, Laws 632 c, Aristot. Eth. Nic. 
1116 b24, Strictly speaking, Plato would recognize four 
grades, (1) philosophic bravery, (2) the bravery of the 
érixoupor here defined, (3) casual civic bravery in ordinary 
states, (4) animal instinct, which hardly deserves the name. 
Cf. Laches 196 ©, Mill, Nature, p. 47 ** Consistent courage 
is always the effect of cultivation,” etc., Unity of Plato's 
Thought, nn. 46 and 77. 

© Phaedo 69 B. 

6 vouimov of the mss. yields quite as good a meaning as 


that have such dread? power to scour our faiths away, 
pleasure more potent than any detergent or abstergent 
to accomplish this, and pain and fear and desire more 
sure than anylye. This power in the soul, then, this 
unfailing conservation of right and lawful belief? about 
things to be and not to be feared is what I call and 
would assume to be courage, unless you have something 
different tosay.” ‘‘No, nothing,” said he; “for I pre- 
sume that you consider mere right opinion about the 
same matters not produced by education, that which 
may manifest itself in a beast or a slave,° to have little 
or nothing to dowith law? and that you would callit by 
another name than courage.” “That is most true,” 
said I. ** Well then,” he said, “I accept this as bravery.” 
“Do so,” said I, “ and you will be right with the 
reservation ¢ that it is the courage of acitizen. Some 
other time if it please you, we will discuss it more 
fully. At present we were not seeking this but justice; 
and for the purpose of that inquiry I believe we have 
done enough.” “ You are quite right,” he said. 
VIII. “ Two things still remain,” said I, “ to make 
out in our city, soberness? and the object of the whole 

Stobaeus’s udrviwov. The virtuous habit that is inculcated 
by Jaw is more abiding than accidental virtue. 

¢ ye marks a reservation as 415 £ crpatrwotixds ye, Polit. 309 5, 
Laws 710 a rh inuddn ye. Plotinus, unlike some modern com- 
mentators, perceived this. Cf. Enn.i.2.3. In Phaedo 82 a 
wohirixyy isused disparagingly of ordinary bourgeoisvirtue. In 
Xen. Rep. Lac. 10.7 and Aristot. Eth. Nic. iii. 8. 1 (1116 a 17) 
there is no disparagement. The word is often used of citizen 
soldiery as op to professional mercenaries. 

4 This dismissal of the subject is sometimes fancifully 
taken as a promise of the Laches. Cf. Unity of Plato’s 
Thought, nn. 77 and 603. 

9 Matthew Arnold’s word. Butcf. on 389 p and 430 e— 
“sobriety,” “‘ temperance,” “ Besonnenheit.”’ 


431 ¢ 


eveka mavra Cnrodmev Sucacoovyn. Ilavy pev obv. 
Ils ody av thy Sucaroodyny evpoev, iva pnere 
Tpayparevwpela mept owdpootvns; “Eya pev 
, ” ” y> nN . 7 > \ 
Towvv, éfn, ovTe olda ovr’ av Bovdoiuny adro 
/ ~ 
mpoTepov pavivat, elmep pyKete emioxepoucla 
4, , 
awhpoavvnv: adr «i Euovye BovAcr xapilecbar, 
/ ~ 7 
GKOTEL TpPOTEpoV TOTO éxeivou. "AAG pévTor, Hv 
> > 
5° éyw, BovAowat ye, et Ha dSucd. Under Sy, 
edn. UKenréov, elrrov: Kat ws ye evred0ev weir, 
Evpdwvria Tiwi Kal dppovia mpocéotke waAdov 7) TA 
/ TI ~ > K , , 8° > 7 € 
TpOTEpov. @s; Kéopos mov tis, Hv eyo, 7) 
swdpoatvyyn éoti Kal jdovdv twav Kal émibvpudv 
>? /, ~ 
eyKpdreia, ws dao, Kpeitrw 81) adtod Aéyovtes 
ov« old” dvtwa tpdmov, Kal dAAa atta Tovadra. 
LA ol 
@omep ixvn adrtis daivera: 4 yap; Lavrwr 
~ / 
pdAora, oy. Od«oby 70 pev KpelrTw adTob 
yerotov; 6 yap eavrod Kpetrrov Kal irre Oxmov 
av adrtod «in Kal 6 7TTwv KpeitTwY' 6 abros yap 
> Ld U4 , /Q> * > > 
€v dmact TovToLs mpooayopeverar. Tid’ ov; “AX’, 
hv & éyw, daiverai por BovrAcobar A€yew odtos 6 
/ a > > ~ ~ > 4 ‘ A A 
Adyos, as Tt ev adT@ TH dvO pare mepl THY poxipy 
To prev BéATiov ev, TO dé yelpov, Kat OTav pev 
70 BéAtiov didaer Tod xelpovos éyKpares H, TOOTO 
Aéyew TO Kpeittw adtod- eave? yobv: Grav dé bd 

@ ef uy dbuxe is idiomatic, “I ought to.” Cf. 608 pb, 
612, Menex. 236 B. 

® Of. Gorg. 506 £ ff. cwppocivn and cwdpoveiv sometimes 
mean etymologically of sound mind or level head, with or 
without ethical suggestion, according to the standpoint of 
the speaker. Of. Protag. 333 B-c. Its two chief meanings 
in Greek usage are given in 389 p-e: subordination to due 
authority, and control of appetite, both raised to higher 


inquiry, justice.” “Quite so.” “If there were 
only some way to discover justice so that we need 
not further concern ourselves about soberness.” 
“Well, I, for my part,” he said, “ neither know of 
any such way nor would I wish justice to be dis- 
covered first if that means that we are not to go on 
to the consideration of soberness. But if you desire 
to please me, consider this before that.” “It would 
certainly be very wrong * of me not to desire it,’”’ said 
I. “Go on with the inquiry then,” he said. “I 
must go on,” I replied, “ and viewed from here it 
bears more likeness to a kind of concord and harmony 
than the other virtues did.” ““Howso?” ‘ Sober- 
ness is a kind of beautiful order ® and a continence of 
certain pleasures and appetites, as they say, using 
the phrase ‘ master of himself’ I know not how; 
and there are other similar expressions that as it 
were point us to the same trail. Is that not so?” 
“Most certainly.” “‘ Now the phrase ‘ master of 
himself’ is an absurdity, is it not? For he who is 
master of himself would also be subject to himself, 
and he who is subject to himself would be master. 
For the same person is spoken of in all these expres- 
sions.” ‘‘ Ofcourse.” “ But,” said I,“ the intended 
meaning of this way of speaking appears to me to be 
that the soul of a man within him has a better part 
and a worse part, and the expression self-mastery 
means the control of the worse by the naturally 
better part. Itis, at any rate, a term of praise. But 
significance in Plato’s definition. As in the case of bravery, 
Plato distinguishes the temperamental, the bourgeois, the 
disciplined and the philosophical virtue. But he affects to 
feel something paradoxical in the very idea of self-control, 

as perhaps there is. Cf. Laws 626 & ff., 863 p, A.J.P. vol. 
xiii. pp. 361 f., Unity of Plato’s Thought, nn. 77 and 78. 



Tpodpis Kakis q Twos opudias Kparn Oy b770 mn 
ous 708 xelpovos O}LuKpoTEpov TO BéArvov 6 dv, ToOTO 
B dé ws ev oveider Yéyew Te Kal Kadciv yTTw EavTod 
kal aKdAaotov Tov ovTw Svaetpevov. Kai yap 
” ” > > 
EouKer, édy). ’A7oBaAerre TOWUY, jv 8 eye, m™pos 
Tv véay Huey mow, Kat evprcets ev oorh, TO 
ETepov TovTwy eévov: KpeltTw yap adtny adris 
duxaiws gProeis mpooayopevecbar eimep ov TO 
apewvov Tod xEipovos apxet o@dpov KAnréov Kat 
KpetTTov adroo. “AM dm oPAérw, én, Kal adnOF 
Aéyers. Kai pv Kat tds ye mods Kal mavTo~ 
C damas emBupias Kal movds TE Kal Avmas € ev moval 
pdduota av tis evpor Kal yuvaréi Kal oikérais Kal 
T&v édevbépwv Aeyopévwv év Tots moAAois Te Kal 
, , 4 s A , € a ‘ 
gavros. Ilavy pey odv. Tas 8€ ye amAds te Kat 
/ a \ A ~ A , > ~ 
petpias, at 517) peta vod te Kat ddEns dpOAs Aoy- 
ou@ dyovra, ev dAlyous te emited&eu Kal Tots 
/ A ~ / A “~ 
BeAriora pev dor, BéAtiota Se madevHetow. 
“Ady OA, edn. Odxotv kat Tatra opas évovra cot ev 
TH monet, Kal KpaToupevas: avToAe Tas emupias 
D tas ev tots mohhois TE Kab patrous bd Te TOV 
emBupucdy Kal Tijs pporncews Tijs ev tots eAdtroot 
TE Kal emeikeotépois; “Eywy’, épn. 
IX. Ei dpa det twa woAw mpocayopeview KpeirTw 
Hodovav Te Kat emiOupudv Kat adriv abris, Kat Tav- 

® Cf. Phaedr. 250 a. 

> Cf. 442 a, Laws 689 a-s. The expression is intended to 
remind us of the parallelism between man and state. See 
Introd. p. xxxv. ¢ Cf. Symp. 189 §. 

4 Cf. 441 v, 443 B, 573 v. 

* ravrodamés is disparaging in Plato. Cf. 557 c. 

t ratct: so Wolf, for ms. ract, a frequent error. Cf. 494 B. 



when, because of bad breeding or some association,* 
the better part, which is the smaller, is dominated 
by the multitude? of the worse, I think that our speech © 
censures this as a reproach,’ and calls the man in 
this plight unselfcontrolled and licentious.” “‘ That 
seems likely,’ he said. “ Turn your eyes now upon 
our new city,” said I, “ and you will find one of these 
conditions existent in it. For you will say that it is 
justly spoken of as master of itself if that in which 4 
the superior rules the inferior is to be called sober 
and self-mastered.” “Ido turn my eyes uponit,” he 
said, “and it isas yousay.” ‘“‘ And again, the mob of 
motley ¢ appetites and pleasures and pains one would 
find chiefly in children’ and women and slaves and in 
the base rabble of those who are freemen in name.’ ” 
“ By all means.” “ But the simple and moderate 
appetites which with the aid of reason and right 
opinion are guided by consideration you will find in 
few and those the best born and best educated.” 
“ True,” he said. “ And do you not find this too in 
your city and a domination there of the desires in the 
multitude and the rabble by the desires and the 
wisdom that dwell in the minority of the better 
sort?” “Ido,” he said. 

IX. “ If, then, there is any city that deserves to be 
described as master of its pleasures and desires and 
self-mastered, this one merits that designation.” 

Plato, like Shakespeare’s Rosalind, brackets boys and women 
as creatures who have for every passion something and for 
no passion truly anything. 

* Cf. on 336 a. The ordinary man who is passion’s slave 
is not truly free. The Stoics and Cynics preached many 
sermons on this text. See Persius, Sat. v. 73 and 124, 
a Diss. iv. 1, Xen. Mem. iv. 5. 4, Xen. Oecon. 1. 






Tyv mpoopytéov. Tlavrdmact ev odv, edn. *Ap’ 
> > \ / ~ 
obv od Kat owdpova Kata mavra Tabra; Kai pada, 
” ‘ A ” > 
én. Kai pry eirep abd ev adn moda 4 adr? Sd€a 
A a 
Eveott Tols Te dpxYovot Kal apyopevors mepl Tod 
4 a ~ 
ovotwas Sei dpyew, Kal ev ravTn av ely TovTO 
> 7s " > a 
evov' 7) od Soxet; Kai pada, edn, odddpa. *Ev 
/ s / ~ A a 
moTépois obv dyoeis THv ToATaY TO Gwopovetv 
> a Ld 4 »” a 
eveivar, Stav ovTws Exwouw, ev Tols apxYovow 7 EV 
it's , > > a 
Tois apyouevois; *Ev apdorépous mov, édyn. “Opas 
= - 8° > tA @ > ~ > , » 
obv, Hv 8 éeyd, dt emek@s euavrevdpeba aprt, 
¢ ¢ / \ ¢€ 4 c / £ 8 , 
Ws appovia Twi % cwdpoovyvn wpoiwrar; Tt 67; 
a > 7 
Or ody dorep % avdpeia Kai 4 codia ev pépet 
\e¢ / > ~ e \ , € > (elt 4 , A 
Twl éxarépa evotca 7) wev codyv, 7 Se avdpetav THV 
/ / a 
moAw mapetxeto, ody odTw Tove? adtn, GAAG Sv 
4 > an ~ 
dAns atexyv@s tératat, Sia Tacdv Tapexouevn 
EvvdSovras tods te dobeveotdrovs tabrov Kat 
a! > 7 
rods layupotdrous Kat Tods péaous, et prev BovAct, 
/, > se 
dpoviaer, et S¢ BovrAe, ioxvi, ef 5é, Kal wAjDa 7 
/ ~ a 
Xpjpacw 7 dAlw dtwodv trav TowodTwr woTeE 

* Plato is again proceeding by seemingly minute verbal 
links. Cf. supra 354 a, 379 B, 412 p. Kat wjv introduces 
a further verification of the definition. 

» ov marks the slight hesitation at the deviation from the 
symmetry of the scheme which would lead us to expect, as 
Aristotle and others have taken it, that cwdpoctvy is the 
distinctive virtue of the lowest class. _ It is so practically for 
the lower sense of cwdpoctvy, but in the higher sense of the 
willingness of each to fulfil his function in due subordination 
to the whole, it is common to all classes, 

¢ Of. 430 x. Aristotle gives this as an example of 
(faulty) definition by metaphor (Topics iv. 3. 5). 



“* Most assuredly,” he said. “ And is it not also to 
be called sober ? in all these respects?” “* Indeed it 
is,’ he said. “‘ And yet again, if there is any city 
in which the rulers and the ruled are of one mind 
as to who ought to rule, that condition will be found 
in this. Don’t youthink so?’’ “I most emphatic- 
ally do,” he said. ‘ In which class of the citizens, 
then, will you say that the virtue of soberness has 
its seat when this is their condition? In the rulers 
or in the ruled?” “In both, I suppose,” he said. 
“ Do you see then,” said I, “ that our intuition was 
not a bad one just now that discerned a likeness 
between soberness and a kind of harmony‘*?” “ Why 
so?” “Because its operation is unlike that of 
courage and wisdom, which residing in separate 
parts respectively made the city, the one wise and 
the other brave. That is not the way of soberness, 
but it extends literally through the entire gamut 4 
throughout, bringing about? the unison in the same 
chant of the strongest, the weakest and the inter- 
mediate, whether in wisdom or, if you please in 
strength, or for that matter in numbers, wealth, or any 
similar criterion. So that we should be quite right 

4 &f dys: 8c. THs TOdews, but as drexrGs shows (ef. supra on 
419 £) it already suggests the musica! metaphor of the entire 
octave 61a racGr. 

* The word order of the following is noteworthy. The 
translation gives the meaning. ‘rairév, the object of ov- 
gdorras, is, by a trait of style that grows more frequent in 
the Laws and was imitated by Cicero, so placed as to break 
the monotony of the accusative terminations. 

? For the comparison the kind of superiority is indifferent. 
See Thompson on Meno 71 © and compare the enumeration of 
claims to power in the Laws, diujpata . . . Toi adpyew, Laws 
690 a ff. and infra 434 B. 



opBorar’ av paipev Tavrny THY Opevovay owdpo- 

ovvnv elvar, Xelpovds TE kal dyretvovos: KaTa puow 
B Evpdeviar, omotepov Set dpyew Kal ev mode Kal 
ev evt éxdorw. Ildve pot, €$n, Evvdoxe?. Elev, 
iy 8 eyes" TO. _pev Tpia jpiv ev TH TrdAe KaT@NTAL, 
as ye odrwat Sdgau- To 8€ 87 Aourdy eldos, dv 6 
dy eTt dperijs perexou mods, Ti mot av ein; ShAov 
yap, or TOUTO €oTW 1 Sucaroovvn. Ajrov. Ovk- 
obv, & TAadkcwv, viv 51) Huds Set Worep KuvnyeTas 
Twas Odpvov KUKA® mepuiotacban Tpooexovras Tov 
voov, un 77 Suaddiyn 7 Sucacoodvy Kal dpavi- 
‘C obetoa adn ros yevnras® davepov yap 97) ore Tabry 
™ €oTw: dpa. obv Kal mpobupod KaTideiv, edv mos 
mpoTepos euod dys Kal enol ppaons. Ei yap 
apehov, édn: adda paddAov, édv por éEmopevw xpH 
Kal Ta Seucvdpeva Suvapevy kabopay, mdvy prot 
perpieos XpHoEL. “Ezov, 7) qv & eyes, evEduevos: per’ 
euod. Toujow Tabra,, aAAa pdvor, i) 8° és, nyob. 
Kat pv, elrov éeyd, ddeBards yé tis 6 ToTos 

* The final statement of the definition, which, however, 
has little significance for Plato’s thought, when isolated from 
its explanatory context. Cf. Def. Plat. 413 x, Unity of 
Plato's Thought, pp. 15f.,n. 82. Quite idle is the discussion 
whether cwdpoctvn is otiose, and whether it can be absolutely 
distinguished from d:xacoovvn, They are sufficiently dis- 
tinguished for Plato’s purpose in the imagery and analogies 
of the Republic. > Cf. on 351 £. 

¢ Cf. Dem. xx. 18 and 430 £ ds ye évreidev ideiv. Plato’s 
definitions and analyses are never presented as final. They 
are always sufficient for the purpose in hand. Cf. Unity of 
Plato’s Thought, p. 13, nn. 63-67 and 519. 

4 6¢ 8: ef. my paper on the Origin of the Syllogism, Class, 
Phil. vol. xix. pp. 7 ff. This is an example of the terminology 
of the theory of ideas ‘‘already” in the first four books, 
Cf. Unity of Plato’s Thought, p. 35, n. 238, p. 38. 



in affirming this unanimity ¢ to be soberness, the con- 
cord of the naturally superior and inferior as to which 
ought to rule both in the state and the individual.? ” 
“T entirely concur,” he said. “Very well,” said 
I; ““we have made out these three forms in our 
city to the best of our present judgement.¢ What 
can be the remaining form that 4 would give the city 
still another virtue? For it is obvious that the 
remainder is justice.” ‘“‘ Obvious.” ‘‘ Now then,? 
Glaucon, is the time for us like huntsmen / to surround 
the covert and keep close watch that justice may not 
slip through and get away from us and vanish from 
our sight. It plainly must be somewhere hereabouts. 
Keep your eyes open then and do your best to descry 
it. You may see it before I do and point it out 
to me.” ‘‘ Would that I could,” he said; “ but I 
think rather that if you find in me one who can 
follow you and discern what you point out to him 
you will be making a very fair? use of me.” “‘ Pray* 
for success then,” said I, “ and follow along with 
me.” “That I will do, only lead on,” he said. 
“ And truly,” said I, ‘‘ it appears to be an inaccessible 

* viv dn: 1.€. viv Hon. 

! Cf. Soph. 235 8, Euthydem. 290 s-c, Phaedo 66 c, Laws 
654 ©, Parmen. 128 c, Lysis 218 c, Thompson on Meno 96 x, 
Huxley, Hume, p. 139 ** There cannot be two passions more 
pearly resembling: each other than hunting and philosophy.” 
Cf. Hardy’s “He never could beat the covert of con- 
versation without starting the game.” The elaboration of 
the image here is partly to mark the importance of d:cacocivn 
and y to relieve the monotony of continuous ar ent, 

* It is not necessary, though plausible, to emend jerpiws 
to ywerply. The latter is slightly more idiomatical. Cf. 
Terence’s ** benigno me utetur patre.”’ 

* Prayer is the proper preface of any act. Cf. Tim. 27 0, 
Laws 712 8. 



daiverat Kal émicKios: éoTt yodv oKorewds Kai 
D dvadvepedvntos: adAa yap dpws itéov. *Iréov yap, 
efn. Kal ey Katidav "lod tod, efmov, d TAavcwv: 
Kwdvvevopev TL Exe tyvos, Kal pot SoKet od Tavu 
te expev€eicbar yds. Ed ayyéAdes, 7 8 ds. 
7H / 7 3° > , r / ¢ ~ \ / ; 
pny, hv & eyw, BrakiKov ye yuadv TO Taos. 
To zotov; IdAa, & paxdpie, daiverat mpo 
Toda yuiv e€ adpyns KvAWwdetobat, Kal ody Ewpd- 
” > ¢ He. > 2 , oe 
fev ap avrd, GA’ Huev KatayeAaororaTo: wo- 
TEp ot ev Tais xepow Eeyxovtes Cyntobaw eviote 6 
” cal 
Exovar, Kal jets ets adTo prev ovK aeBAémoper, 
Toppw dé mou amecKkoTotpev, 7 87) Kal eAdvOavev 
mu ¢ a ~ ” / Ld e 
tows nas. lds, edn, A™yeirs; Otrws, elzov, ws 
Soxotuer pow Kal A€yovtes adtd Kal dkovovTes 
mdAar od pavOdvew dv adbradv, dt. ééyouev 
tporov Twa adtd. Maxpov, éfn, TO mpootmiov TO 
emOupodvrTe aKkovoat. 

433 X. ’AAN’, Fv 8 eyd, dxove, ef Tt dpa Adyw. 
“ 4 > > ~ 17 cal ~ ‘ / 
6 yap e€ apyfs eOéucba Seiv moretv 1a mavtds, 
Ore THY TOAW KaTwKilopev, TOOTA EoTLW, Ws epol 

A .3 
Sokel, HTOL ToUTOV TL eldos 7) SiKatoatvyn. €OeueDa 
A / ‘ J *\ / > , ao 
5€ Simov Kai toAAdKis €A€yomev, et peuvyncat, ort 
éva €xaoTov €v déor emitndevew THv tept TH 
/ > a > a ¢ / > 8 Vy ~ 
moAw, eis 6 adrod 7 piats emitydSevoTdtn meduKvia 

* 7s wd@os: for the periphrasis cf. 376 a. 

> Cf. Theaetet. 201 a. 

¢ A homely figure such as Dante and Tennyson sometimes 

4 This sounds like Hegel but is not Hegelian thought. 

* Cf. on 344 ©. Justice is a species falling under the 
vague genus 7d éavrod mpdrrew, which Critias in the Char- 
mides proposed as a definition of cwppocivy (Charm. 161 B), 



place, lying in deep shadows.” “It certainly is a 
dark covert, not easy to beat up.” “ But all the 
same on we must go.” “Yes, on.” And I caught 
view and gave a hulloa and said, ‘‘ Glaucon, I think 
we have found its trail and I don’t believe it will get 
away from us.” “I am glad to hear that,” said he. 
“ Truly,” said I, “* we were slackers? indeed.” “ How 
so?” ‘“* Why, all the time, bless your heart, the 
thing apparently was tumbling about our feet? from 
the start and yet we couldn't see it, but were most 
Indicrous, like people who sometimes hunt for what 
they hoid in their hands.“ So we did not turn our 
eyes upon it, but looked off into the distance, which 
was perhaps the reason it escaped us.” ‘‘ What do 
you mean?” he said. “ This,” I replied, “ that it 
seems to me that though we were speaking of it 
and hearing about it all the time we did not under- 
stand ourselves? or realize that we were speaking of 
it in a sense.” ‘“* That is a tedious prologue,” he 
said, “ for an eager listener.” 

X. “ Listen then,” said I, “ and learn if there is any- 
thing in what I say. For what we laid down in the 
beginning as a universal requirement when we were 
founding our city, this I think, or * some form of this, 
is justice. And what we did lay down, and often said, 
if you recall, was that each one man must perform 
one social service in the state for which his nature 
was best adapted.” “Yes, we said that.” “* And 
but failed to sustain owing to his inability to distinguish the 
various possible meanings of the phrase. In the Republic 
too we have hitherto failed to “learn from ourselves” its 
true meaning, till now when Socrates begins to perceive that 
if taken in the higher sense of spiritual division of labour in 

the soul and in the state, it is the long-sought justice. Cf. 
infra 433 B-c-p, 443 c-p. 



ein, "Edéyouev yap. Kai pry ore ye 76 ta adTob 
mparrew Kal p71) moAuTpaypoveiv SiuKaoovvyn earl, 
B kal todto d\Awy te moAA@v akyKdapev Kal adrot 
moAAdkis eipjxapev. Eipjxayev yap. Todro tol- 
vuv, iy 8 3S eye, ® dire, Kuduvever Tpdmov Twa 
yeyvopevov 7%) Suxaroovvy elvan, TO Ta adToo mpaT- 
Tew. olaba dbev TEKalpopLa 5 Ovx, adda dey’ > 
éfn. Aoxet ror, Hv 8 eyw, 7d baddovrov ev TH 
moNet av eoxéeupela, owdpoovyns Kal dvdpetas 
kal dpovijcews, Toro elvar, 6 ma&ow exelvous THY 
dvvapuy Tapeoxev, wate eyyeveobat, Kal eyyevope- 
vous ‘ye OwTnplav Tapéxew, Ewomrep av evi. KaiTou 
C epapev Sucavoodyyy €ocabar TO drroAeupbev € exeivwv, 
el Ta Tpla eUpouysev. Kai yap dvdyin, edn. 
"AAG pevrot, iy dS éya, ef d€ou ye Kpivat, tt TH 
ToAw jpiv todtwv pdadvota ayabiy dmepydoerat 
eyyevopevov, SvoKpitov av ein, TOTEpov 1) dpo0dokia 
T@V d.pxovrey TE Kal apxopevany, 7) Tept Sewdy 
TE Kal py, atta earl, ddéys evvopou cwrnpia ev 
Tots orparubrats eyyevonern, 7] 7) ev Tots apyovat 
D dpovnats TE xal purany evodoa, y) TOvTO pddvora 
dyabnv abriy Tovet evov kal ev made kal ev 
yovaurt Kal Sovhw Kad erevbepw Kal Snproupy@ 
Kal dpxovre Kal dpxopnevey, 67 TO adTOb ExaoTos €is 
av ETPATTE Kal ovK emoAumpaypovet. Avoxpirov, 
é¢n’ m@s 8 od; *EvdpiAdov dpa, ws €ouxe, mpos 

* This need not refer to any specific passage in the 
dialogues. Cf. Unity of Plato’s Thought, n. 236. A 
Greek could at any time say that minding one’s own 
business and not being a busybody is c&¢pov or dixatov or 

> rpdrov Twa yeyvduevov: as in the translation, not “justice 



again that to do one’s own business and not to be a 
busybody is justice, is a saying that we have heard 
from many and have very often repeated ourselves.*” 
“We have.” “This, then,” I said, “‘ my friend, if 
taken in a certain sense appears to be justice,” this 
principle of doing one’s own business. Do you know 
whence I infer this?” ‘‘ No, but tell me,” he said. 
“I think that this is the remaining virtue in the 
state after our consideration of soberness, courage, 
and intelligence, a quality which made it possible 
for them all to grow up in the body politic and which 
when they have sprung up preserves them as long 
as it is present. And I hardly need to remind you 
that ° we said that justice would be the residue after 
we had found the other three.” ‘“ That is an un- 
avoidable conclusion,” he-said. ‘‘ But moreover,” 
said I, “if we were required to decide what it is 
whose indwelling presence will contribute most to 
making our city good, it would be a difficult decision 
whether it was the unanimity of rulers and ruled or 
the conservation in the minds of the soldiers of the 
convictions produced by law as to what things are 
or are not to be feared, or the watchful intelligence 
that resides in the guardians, or whether this is the 
chief cause of its goodness, the principle embodied 
in child, woman, slave, free, artisan, ruler, and ruled, 
that each performed his one task as one man and was 
not a versatile busybody.” ‘‘ Hard to decide indeed,” 
he said. “A thing, then, that in its contribution to 
seems somehow to be proving to be this.” Of. 432 5, 516 c, 
Lysis 217 2, Laws 910 8, infra 495 a, 596 p, Goodwin, Moods 
and Tenses, 830. Yet, cf. Polit. 291 pv. 

¢ cairo: cf. on 360 c and 376 8. Here it points out the 

significance of 7d dré\ovror if true, while d\A\a pévro intro- 
duces the considerations that prove it true. 

VOL. I 2B 369 



dperny Toews Th TE copia. adrijs Kal Th varied 

oun Kal TH avdpeia % Tod ExaoTov ev ad 7a 
aitod mpdrrew dSivayis. Kat pad’, edn. Odx- 
obv Sixaoovvnv Td ye TovTows evdpwtAdov av eis 
apetiv moAews Oeins; Tlavrdmact pev obv. LKd- 
met 07) Kal THOSE, ef ovTW Sd~er. dpa Tots dp- 
> ol / A / / / 
xovow ev TH ToAct Tas Sikas mpootakers SiKalew; 
/ ~ a 
Tt phy; °H aAdov odtwocobv paddov édrépevor 
Ul ” 4 eS Ye 
Sucdcovow 7 TovTov, dmws av ExacTor HT Exwot 
> / / ~ € nn / ” > 
TaAASTpia pHATE TOV adita@v orépwvtar; OvK, adda 
4 ¢ ‘ ” / ‘ U4 
tovtov. ‘Qs duxaiov dvtos; Nai. Kai ta 
uv ¢ ~ e “~ 
apa 7 % TOO oikelov Te Kal €avTod Ebis TE Kat 
mpatis Sixkacoodvyn av ouodroyotro. “Eort tabtra. 
*1de 51}, éav col Orep euot EvvdoKH. TEKTwWV 
OKYTOTOMOU emixetp@v épya epydleoba 7 oKuTo- 
TOMos TEKTOVOS, 7 TO _ Spyava jeradapBdvorres 
TAAAHAWY 7) TyLds, ] Kal 6 avros emtyeipdv audo- 
TEpa mpaTrew, mavTa TaAAa peradAaTTopeva apd. 
4 A , / / > / wv 
got ay TL doxe? péya Brdibar woAw; Od ) avy, ep. 
*AAN’ orav ye, olwar, Snpvoupyos Ov 7 TUs aAAos 

B XPywarvoTHs | puoer, € ETTELTO. €mratpopLevos 7 mAovTw 

7 TAHOE 7) taxi 7 aArAw Tw TowovTw els TO TOO 
moAcutKob eldos emiyeiph lévar, 7 T@v moAcuuKav 
Tis eis TO TOO BovdevTiKod Kat pvAaKkos avatios 

@ ye argues from the very meaning of évduidd\ov. Cf. supra 
379 B. 

> So Phaedo 79 & &pa 5} Kai ride. It introduces a further 
confirmation. The mere judicial and conventional concep- 
tion of justice can be brought under the formula in a fashion 
(7y infra), for legal justice “ est constans et perpetua voluntas 
ius suum cuique tribuens.” Cf. supra 331 © and Aristot. 
Rhet. 1366 b 9 ort bé Sixacootyn mev apeTh Oe ty 7a abray Exacra 
éxovot, Kal ws 6 vduos. 

* ra\dérpia: the article is normal; Stallb. on Phaedr. 230 a. 


the excellence of a state vies with and rivals its 
wisdom, its soberness, its bravery, is this principle 
of everyone in it doing his own task.” “‘ It is indeed,” 
he said. “ And is not justice the name you would 
have to give * to the principle that rivals these as con- 
ducing to the virtue of state?’’ “ By all means,” 
“ Consider it in this wise too® if so you will be con- 
vinced. Will you not assign the conduct of lawsuits 
in your state to the rulers?”’ “Ofcourse.” ‘ Will 
not this be the chief aim of their decisions, that no 
one shall have what belongs to others ¢ or be deprived 
of his own?” ‘“‘ Nothing else but this.” ‘“‘ On the 
assumption that this is just?” “Yes.” “‘ From 
this point of view too, then, the having? and doing 
of one’s own and what belongs to oneself would 
admittedly be justice.” ‘‘ That is so.” “* Consider 
now ¢ whether you agree with me. A carpenter under- 
taking to do the work of a cobbler or a cobbler of a 
carpenter or their interchange of one another’s tools 
or honours or even the attempt of the same man 
to do both—the confounding of all other functions 
would not, think you, greatly injure a state, would 
it?” “Not much,” he said. ‘‘ But when I fancy 
one who is by nature an artisan or some kind of 
money-maker tempted and incited by wealth or 
command of votes or bodily strength or some similar 
advantage tries to enter into the class of the soldiers 
or one of the soldiers into the class of counsellors and 
guardians, for which he is not fitted, and these inter- 
For the ambiguity of réANérpia cf. 443 D. So oixelov is one’s 
own in either the literal or in the ideal sense of the Stoics and 
Emerson, and éav7oi is similarly ambiguous. C/. on 443 p. 
# és is still fluid in Plato and has not yet taken the 

technical Aristotelian meaning of habit or state. 
* A further confirmation. For what follows cf. 421 a. 



C4 ‘ - Z 
wv, Kat Ta GAAjAwY odtou dpyava peraAapPdvwor 
\ \ ~ : 
Kal Tas TYyds, 7) OTav 6 adTos mdvTa TadTa dpa 
> od a 

\ , 

THY TovTwY peTaBoAny Kal todumpaypoovrny Ore- 

Opov elvar rH méAc. Tavrdact pev obv. ‘H tprdv 

»” ” ~ 

apa ovtwv yev@v troAurpaypoovvn Kat wetaBodr «is 

” Ul / ~ / ‘ > , > 
C ddAnha Heyiorn Te BAdBy TH mode Kal opbdrar’ 

av mpocayopevoito pdduora KaKxoupyia. Kouidp 

\ a A 
pev odv. Kaxoupyiay S€ tiv peyiorny THs €avTod 

/ ~ 
moAews ovK adikiay gdyoes elva; lds 8 ov; 
Todro pév dpa dduxia. 

XI. [ldAw dé dde Aéywpev: xypnuatiotixod, ém- 
koupikod, dudakikod yévous oiKketompayia, EKdoTOU 
ToUTWwY TO ab’Tob mpaTToVTos év méoXEL, TobvarTioV 
> , 4 > Dae, | W \ \ / / 
exeivov Suxatoavyyn 7° ay ein Kal thy moAw SiKalav 

D mapéxor. Odx addAn eporye Soxe?, 7 8 Gs, Exew 
” t4 M 8 / > > > a La / 

9 tavtTn. Myder, fv S éeyd, mw mdv mayiws 
aS. / > > 2A A c a A > 7 
adro Adywuev, add’ éeav pev jyiv Kat eis eva 
ExaoTov Tav avOpwmwv idv 7d €ldos Toito opo- 

2 pddiora with kaxoupyia. 
> rédkw, “again,” here means conversely. Cf. 425 a. 
The definition is repeated in terms of the three citizen classes 
to prepare the way for testing it in relation to the individual 
soul, which, if the analogy is to hold, must possess three 
corresponding faculties or parts. The order of words in this 
and many Platonic sentences is justified by the psychological 
“investigation,” which showed that when the question 
‘which do you like best, apples, pears, or cherries?’’ was 
resented in the form “ apples, pears, cherries, which do you 
ike best?” the reaction time was appreciably shortened. 



change their tools and their honours or when the 
same man undertakes all these functions at once, 
then, I take it, you too believe that this kind of sub- 
stitution and meddlesomeness is the ruin of a state.” 
“By all means.” “The interference with one another’s 
business, then, of three existent classes and the sub- 
stitution of the one for the other is the greatest injury 
to a state and would most rightly be designated 
as the thing which chiefly * works it harm.” “ Pre- 
cisely so.” ‘“‘ And the thing that works the greatest 
harm to one’s own state, will you not pronounce 
to be injustice?”” “‘ Of course.” “‘ This, then, is 

XI. “Again,” let us put itin this way. The proper 
functioning ° of the money-making class, the helpers 
and the guardians, each doing its own work in the 
state, being the reverse of that 4 just described, would 
be justice and would render the city just.” “I 
think the case is thus and no otherwise,” said he. 
“Let us not yet affirm it quite fixedly,’ I said, “ but 
if this form’ when applied to the individual man, is 

* oixetorpayia: this coinage is explained by the genitive 
absolute. Proclus (Kroll i. p. 207) substitutes adrorpayia. 
So Def. Plat. 411 5. 

@ éxeivou: cf. éxeivors, 425 a. 

* rayiws: cf. 479 c, Aristot. Met. 1062 b 15. 

The doctrine of the transcendental ideas was undoubtedly 
familiar to Plato at this time. Cf. supra on 402 B, and 
Unity of Plato's Thought, p. 31, n. 194, p. 35. But we 
need not invoke the theory of rapoveia here to account for 
this slight personification of the form, idea, or definition of 
justice. Cf. 538 p, and the use of é\@dév in Eurip. Suppl. 
562 and of iévy in Phileb. 52 x. Plato, in short, is merely 
saying vivaciously what Aristotle technically says in the 
words de? dé rofro wh pbvov Kabddov AéyeoOa, GAAA Kal Trois 
xaé” Exacta épapudrreav, Eth. Nic. 1107 a 28, 





~ \ eae 2 A 
Aoyfrae Kal exe? Sixavoovvyn elvar, Evyywpnodpcba 
wv / \ ‘ > ~ 
non TL yap Kal epotwev; ei d€ yn, ToTE GAAO Tt 
/ ~ 
oxepoucba: viv 8 exreAdowpev Thy oKxepw, TV 
> 7 > > ~ 
wnOnpev, ei ev peilovi tur TOv exovtTwv SiKato- 
4 / bd] cal > / / 
avvnv mpdtepov exe emuyeipjoamer Oedoacbar, 
ta ” a ‘ 
pdov av év évi avOpwimw Katideiv oldv eott, Kat 
” \ tc a A , 
edofe 51) Hiv todo elvat OAs, Kal otTws @Ki- 
Copev ws edvvapcla apiornv, ed eiddtes OTL EV Ye 
~ > ~ a ~ > 
TH ayabh adv «in. 6 obv hiv éxet efavn, emava- 
/ > ~ ~ 
depwpev eis Tov eva, Kav ev OpodoyhTat, KaAds 
oo > ~ 
eEeu edav 5ێ te GAAo ev TH Evi Eudhaivnrar, wadw 
> / pots A /, ~ ‘ ss 
emaviovTes emt THv ToAWw Bacanoduev, Kal TAX 
a“ > ” ~ ‘ , ° 
av map’ aAAnAa oKxomobvres Kal tpiBovTes woTrep 
b] / > 4 Ps \ UA 
ex mupeiwy exAdprpar Toujoaysev THY SuaLoouryy, 
Kat davepay yevouervyvy BeBarwoaipel? av adrjnv 
map piv adrois. "AAX’, dn, Kab? dddv Te A€yets 

Kat mrovetv xpy ovTws. “Ap” odv, tv 8 eyw, 6 ye 

4 In 368. For the loose internal accusative #v cf. 443 B, 
Laws 666 8, Phaedr. 249 v, Sophist 264 8, my paper on 
Illogical Idiom, 7.4.P.A., 1916, vol. xlvii. p. 213, and the 
school-girl’s ‘‘ This is the play that the reward is offered for 
the best name suggested for it.” 



accepted there also as a definition of justice, we will 
then concede the point—for what else will there be 
to say? But if not, then we will look for something 
else. But now let us work out the inquiry in which? 
we supposed that, if we found some larger thing that 
contained justice and viewed it there,? we should 
more easily discover its nature in the individual man. 
And we agreed that this larger thing is the city, and 
so we constructed the best city in our power, well 
knowing that in the good ° city it would of course be 
found. What. then, we thought we saw there we 
must refer back to the individual and, if it is con- 
firmed, all will be well. But if something different 
manifests itself in the individual, we will return again 
to the state and test it there and it may be that, by 
examining them side by side? and rubbing them 
against one another, as it were from the fire-sticks ¢ 
we may cause the spark of justice to flash forth and 
when it is thus revealed confirm it in our own minds.” 
“Well,” he said, ““ that seems a sound method? and 
that is what we must do.” “ Then,” said I, “ if you 

> éxet though redundant need not offend in this inten- 
tionally anacoluthic and resumptive sentence. Some inferior 
Mss. read éxeivo. Burnet’s <#> is impossible. 

© & ye tH ayaly: ef. on 427 £, and for the force of ye ef. 
379 B, 403 FE. 

4 Cf. Sophist 230 8 r.Oéact wap’ add7Aas, Isoc. Areopagit. 
79, Nic. 17. 

* Cf. L. & S. and Morgan, ** De Ignis Eliciendi Modis,” 
Harvard Studies, vol. i. pp. 15, 21 ff. and 30; and Damascius 
(Ruelle, p. 54, line 18) xai rodré éorw Grep céaigvys avarrera 
PGs adnbelas Gorep Ex Tupeiwy TpocrpiBouevwv, 

? Cf. Gorg. 484 B, Epistle vii. 344 B. 

? Plato often observes that a certain procedure is 
methodical and we must follow it, or that it is at least 
methodical or consistent, whatever the results may be. 



tabrov dv tis mpocetror petldv re Kal &darrov, 
avdpoov tuyxydver dv ratty 4 tadrov mpoo- 
ayopeverat, 7 Suovov; “Opouov, éby. Kat 8ixasos 
dpa drip Siucalas moAews Kar’ abtd 7d Tis 
Sucavoodyns eldos oddev dioicer, dN Gyovos Eorat. 
Oporos, én. AMG, pévrot ods ye ESo€ev elvar 
Sucaia, Ore ev avy TpiTTa. yevn dvoewv evovra TO 
avT@v ekaoTov émparre: owdpwv Sé ad Kal 
avdpela Kat cody bia tdv abtav TovTwv yevav 
aAN’ arta db te Kat ees. “AdnOF, edn. Kat 
Tov €va apa, @ dire, ovTws dfudbcouev, Ta adra 
tadra edn ev TH adTod puyh exovra, Sia Ta adra 
man éxewois TOV adtdv dvouatwv dpbas afod- 
aba. tH mode. Ildoa avdynn, edn. Eis daddAdv 
ye ad, Hv 8 éeyd, & Oavpdore, oxeupa eumenta- 
kapev Trepi yuxiis, etre exer TA Tpla €idn TadTa 
év avTh cite uy. Od mavv por Soxodpev, dn, ets 
gadrJov. tows yap, @® LedK«pares, TO Aeyopevov 

* § ye ravrév: there are several reasons for the seeming 
over-elaboration of the logic in the next few pages. The 
analogy between the three classes in the state and the 
tripartite soul is an important point in Plato’s ethical theory 
and an essential feature in the structure of the Republic. 
Very nice distinctions are involved in the attempt to prove 
the validity of the analogy for the present argument without 
too flagrant contradiction of the faith elsewhere expressed 
in the essential unity of the soul. Cf. Unity of Plato’s 
Thought, p. 42. These distinctions in the infancy of logic 
Plato is obliged to set forth and explain as he proceeds. 
Moreover, he is interested in logical method for its own sake 
(cf. Introd. p. xiv), and is here stating for the first time 
important principles of logic afterwards codified in the 
treatises of Aristotle. 



call a thing by the same* name whether it is big or 
little, is it unlike in the way in which it is called the 
same or like?” “ Like,” he said. “Then a just 
man too will not differ ® at all from a just city in re- 
spect of the very form of justice, but will be like it.” 
“Yes, like.” “ But now the city was thought to be 
just because three natural kinds existing in it per- 
formed each its own function, and again it was sober, 
brave, and wise because of certain other affections 
and habits ¢ of these three kinds.” ‘‘ True,” he said. 
“ Then, my friend, we shall thus expect the individual 
also to have these same forms in his soul, and by 
reason of identical affections of these with those in 
the city to receive properly the same appellations.” 
“ Inevitable,” he said. ‘“‘Goodness gracious,” said I, 
“here is another trifling ¢ inquiry into which we have 
plunged, the question whether the soul really con- 
tains these three forms in itself or not.” ‘‘ It does 
not seem to me at all trifling,” he said, “ for perhaps, 
Socrates, the saying is true that ‘fine things are 

ye marks the inference from the very meaning of radrév. 
Cf. on 379 8B, 389 B, and Polit. 278 £; cf. also Parmen. 139 er. 
he language suggests the theory of ideas. But Plato is 
not now senkine primarily of that. He is merely repeating 
in precise logical form the point already made (434 p-r), 
that the definition of justice in the individual must corres- 
pond point for point with that worked out for the state. 

» Cf. 369 a and Meno 72 8. In Phileb. 12 5-13 c, Plato 
points out that the generic or specific identity does not 
exclude specific or sub-specifie differences. 

* &es is here almost the Aristotelian és. Aristotle, 
Eth. Nic. 1105 b 20, regards wd6y, tes and duvduers as an 
exhaustive enumeration of mental states. For durdueis cf. 
477 c, pinnie: De An. Hayduck, p. 289 dda 7a dv xpos 
mwpaxtixi édetro (why, Ta Tpia pova mwapelAndev. 

0, Cf dike pia mo pethnge 



> / Ad ‘ 
adnbés, Gre yarera ta Kadd. Daiverau, fv 8 
> / _ ‘ > > > 7, e e > A / 

D eyo Kai ed y tof, & Travkwr, cbs 7 eur ddéa, 

~ \ A >? 
axpiBds pev todro ex towdTwv pebddwv, otats 
~ > a / 
viv ev Tots Adyous xpadpcba, od pH mote AdBwyev" 
mv ‘ ~ 
aAAn* yap axporépa Kal mAciwy 6dds 1% émt TodTo 
mv wv td ~ 
ayovoa* laws pévTo. THY ye mpoeipnuevwv TE Kal 
twats ~ 
mpocokenpevwy atiws. OdKxotv ayamnrov; dn: 
> \ \ A ” ~ ~ 
Eu“ol ev yap ev ye TH mapdvte ixav@s av €xou. 
> \ / t ” ‘\ / > / 
AMa pévro, elov, Euovye Kal mavy eEapKéce. 
\ / > 
M7 rotvuv droxduns, ébn, GAAd oxdme. “Ap” 
c¢ a 

E ody jyiv, qv 8 éyd, moAd) avdyKn dpodoyeiv drt 
ye 7a adra ev Exdotw eveoti Hudv eldn Te Kal 
10 Ad > a / > , 4 > a 
On amep ev TH OAL; od yap mov aAdobev execice 

1 The inferior reading d\\d of several good mss. would 

not appreciably affect the meaning. 

* A proverb often cited by Plato with variations. Cf. 
497 D-E. 

» rodro by strict grammatical implication means the 
problem of the tripartite soul, but the reference to this 
passage in 504 B shows that it includes the whole question 
of the definition of the virtues, and so ultimately the whole 
of ethical and political philosophy. We are there told again 
that the definitions of the fourth book are sufficient for the 
purpose. but that complete insight can be attained only by 
relating them to the idea of good. That required a longer 
and more circuitous way of discipline and training. Plato 
then does not propose the *“‘longer way” as a method of 
reasoning which he himself employs to correct the approxi- 
mations of the present discussion. He merely describes it 
as the higher education which will enable his philosophical 
rulers to do that. We may then disregard all idle guesses 
about a “new logic” hinted at in the longer way, and all 
fantastic hypotheses about the evolution of Plato’s thought 
and the composition of the Republic based on supposed 
contradictions between this passage and the later books. 



difficult.’*” ‘‘ Apparently,” said I; “and let me tell 
you, Glaucon, that in my opinion we shall never appre- 
hend this matter® accurately from such methods 
as we are now employing in discussion. For there 
is another longer and harder way that conducts to 
this. Yet we may perhaps discuss it on the level of 
our previous statements and inquiries.” “‘ May we 
not acquiesce in that?” he said; “I for my part 
should be quite satisfied with that for the present.” 
“And I surely should be more than satisfied,” I 
replied. “‘ Don’t you weary then,” he said, “ but 
go on with the inquiry.” “Is it not, then,” said I, 
“impossible for us to avoid admitting ° this much, 
that the same forms and qualities are to be found in 
each one of us that are in the state? They could 

Cf. Introd. p. xvi, “ Idea of Good,” p. 190, Unity of Plato’s 
Thought, p. 16, n. 90; followed by Professor Wilamowitz, 
ii. p. 218, who, however, does not understand the connexion 
of it all with the idea of good. 

Plato the logician never commits himself to more than is 
required by the problem under discussion (¢f. on 353 c), and 
Plato the moralist never admits that the ideal has been 
adequately expressed, but always points to heights beyond. 
Cf. infra 506 ©, 533 a, Phaedo 85 c, Tim. 29 B-c, Soph. 
254 c. 

¢ Plato takes for granted as obvious the general corres- 
pondence which some modern philosophers think it necessary 
to reaffirm. Cf. Mill, Logic, vi. 7. 1 “Human beings 
in society have no properties, but those which are derived 
from and may be resolved into the laws and the nature of 
individual man”; Spencer, Adufobiog. ii. p. 543 “* Society is 
created by its units. . . . The nature of its organization is 
determined by the nature of its units.” 

Plato illustrates the commonplace in a slight digression 
on national characteristics, with a hint of the thought partly 
anticipated by Hippocrates and now identified with Buckle’s 
name, that they are determined by climate and environment. 
Cf. Newman, Introd. to Aristot. Pol. pp. 318-320. 



2 Jn a \ x” ww ” > + 4 
adixrat. yeAotov yap av ein, el tis oinbetn ro 
Oupoedés pn ek Tadv idwwradv ev tais mdédeow 
eyyeyovevat, ot 51) Kal €xovot tavryny Ti aitiay, 
olov of Kata tiv Opdkynv te Kal Unvuxpv Kai 
oxeddv Tt KaTa TOV dvw TéroV, } TO Pirouabés, 6 
5) wept tov map’ Hpiv wddor’ av tis aitidoato 
436 romov, 7) TO piAoxphuatov, 6 mepl Tovs Te DoiiKas 
elvat Kat tos Kata Atyumrov gain tis av ovy 
id ‘ / ” ~ A \ 4 ” 
nora. Kat pada, €dn. Todro pev 81) odtws exer, 
qv & ey, Kat oddev xaAerov yrOva. Od dfra. 
XII. Téde d€ 4dn xadrerdv, &f TH ad7Td rovTwv" 
¢ 4, n ‘ tod ” ” 
exaoTa mpaTTouev 7 Tpiciv ovow dAdo dAdw: 
, Sent See ‘ 1» ns 
pavlavonev pev erépw, Ovupodpcba Sé€ dAAw TOV ev 
Hiv, emObvpodpev 8° ad tpitw Twi r@v mepi tH 
Brpodjv te Kai yévvnow 7dov@v Kat doa TovTwr 
> / hal Ld ~ ~ > iA > ~ 
adeAdad, 7 An TH vxH Kal? Exactov adbrav 
TpaTTopev, OTav Opunowpev Tabr’ EoTrar Ta xa- 
4A ld >-/ , ‘ > ‘ ~ 
Aeva Svopicacba: agiws Adyov. Kai euol Sox, 
” <a / > a (ep ER Ey ” 
Qde roivuv emyeipOpev adra dpilecbar, cite 
A > Vv > d ” 7 BD ~ ~ 
Ta. adta aAdAjAos etre Erepa eorw. Ids; A7jAov 
1 Obviously better than the roirw of the better mss. 
accepted by Burnet. 

@ airidcairo: this merely varies the idiom airiay éyew 
above, ‘‘ predicate of,” “‘say of.” Cf. 599 ©. It was a 
common boast of the Athenians that the fine air of Athens 
preduced a corresponding subtlety of wit. Cf. Eurip. 
Medea 829-830, Isoc. vii. 74, Roberts, The Ancient Boeotians, 

. 59, 76. 
ac prroxphuarov is a virtual synonym of ér:@upnrixdr. Cf. 
580 © and Phaedo 68 c, $2 c. 

¢ In Laws 747 c, Plato tells us that for this or some other 
cause the mathematical education of the Phoenicians and 
Egyptians, which he commends, developed in them ravoupyia 
rather than codia. 

4 The question debated by psychologists from Aristotle 


not get there from any other source. It would be 
absurd to suppose that the element of high spirit 
was not derived in states from the private citizens 
who are reputed to have this quality, as the popula- 
tions of the Thracian and Scythian lands and generally 
of northern regions ; or the quality of love of know- 
ledge, which would chiefly be attributed to? the region 
where we dwell, or the love of money® which we might 
say is not least likely to be found in Phoenicians ¢ and 
the population of Egypt.” “ One certainly might,” 
hereplied. “‘Thisis the fact then,” said I, “and there 
is no difficulty in recognizing it.” ‘“‘ Certainly not.” 

“XII. “ But the matter begins to be difficult when 
you ask whether we do all these things with the 
same thing or whether there are three things and we 
do one thing with one and one with another—learn 
with one part of ourselves, feel anger with another, 
and with yet a third desire the pleasures of nutri- 
tion and generation and their kind, or whether it 
is with the entire soul? that we function in each case 
when we once begin. That is what is really hard to 
determine properly.”” ‘‘I think so too,” he said. 
“ Let us then attempt to define the boundary and 
decide whether they are identical with one another in 

this way.” “How?” “It is obvious that the same 
(Eth. Nic. 1102 a 31) to the present day is still a matter of 
rhetoric, and point of view rather than of strict 

science. For some purposes we must treat the “ faculties ” of 
the mind as distinct entities, for others we must revert to the 
essential unity of the soul. Cf. Arnold’s “ Lines on Butler’s 
Sermons ” and my remarks in The Assault on Humanism. 

Plato himself is well aware of this, and in different 
dialogues emphasizes the aspect that suits his purpose. 
There is no contradiction between this passage and Phaedo 
68 c, na c,and Rep. x. 611-12. Cf. Unity of Plato’s Thought, 
pp. 42-43. 



4 ~ 
ott TadTOV TavavTia ToLEiv ) MAoXEW KATA TAUTOP 
‘ \ 2/ 
ye Kal mpos tadrov odK eOeAjnoer ajua, Wore EaVv 
/ a ~ 
mov evpiokwuev ev adtois Tatra ‘yuyvopeva, 
> / Ld > b] \ te > \ / 
eicdueba Ste od tadTov tv aAAd mrciw. Elev. 
Lore 87) 6 Aéyw. Aéye, edn. ‘Eordvat, elrov, 
\ a 
Kat Kweicbat 70 avTo Gua Kata TO adTo dpa 
dvva / p 0285 nw "B / > / ec 
tov; Ovddapds. "Ett tolvuv axpiBéorepov op0- 
Aoynowpeba, un mH mpotdvres audvoPyTHowper. 
> ~ A 
ei yap tis Aéyou dvOpwrov éatnKoTa, KwobvTa Se 
\ a ‘ 
Tas xeipds te Kal tv Kehadnv, Ott 6 avdTos 
€oTnké TE Kal Kwelrar dua, ovK av, oluat, 
> a A 4 a > > Lj \ / 
a€totwev ottTw Aéyew Setv, GAN Ste TO pev TE 
> “~ \ lal 4 
adtod €oTnke, TO S€ KweiTar, ody oUTWs; OvTuws. 
~ od ¢ a 
Odxobv Kai «i étt paAdov yapevtiloito 6 Tatra 
Aéywv Koprpevdpevos, ws ot ye artpoBiAor sdAor 
€oTdoi Te Gua Kal KwodvTa, drav ev TH adT@ 
cA A / / a“ \ + 
amnéavres TO KévTpov Trepip€pwvrat, 7 Kal GAAO TL 
ond lon ~ = nn 
KUKA® Tepuov ev TH adTh edpa TodTo SpG, ovK av 

@ The first formulation of the law of contradiction. Cf. 
Phaedo 102 ¥, Theaetet. 188 a, Soph. 220 B, infra 602 B. 

Sophistical objections are anticipated here and below 
(436 ©) by attaching to it nearly all the qualifying distinc- 
tions of the categories which Aristotle wearily observes are 
necessary mpds Tas cogiotixas évoxAnoes (De interp. 17 a 
36-37). Cf. Met. 1005 b 22 wpis tas Noyixds Svoxepelas, and 
Rhet. ii. 24. 

Plato invokes the principle against Heraclitism and other 
philosophies of relativity and the sophistries that grew out 
of them or played with their formulas. Cf. Unity of 
Plato’s Thought, pp. 50 ff., 53, 58, 68. Aristotle follows 
Plato in this, pronouncing it racév BeBaordrn dpxyn (Met. 
1005 b 18). 

> xara ratrév=in the same part of or aspect of itself; 
mpos ravréy=in relation to the same (other) thing. Cf. 
Sophist 230 B dua mepl radv adr&v mpds Ta aira Kara Tara 



thing will never do or suffer opposites * in the same 

> in relation to the same thing and at the same 
time. So that if ever we find ¢ these contradictions in 
the functions of the mind we shall know that it was? 
not the same thing functioning but a plurality.” 
“Very well.” “ Consider, then, what I am saying.” 
“Say on,” he replied. “Is it possible for the same 
thing at the same time in the same respect to be at 
rest* and in motion?” “By no means.” “ Let us 
have our understanding still more precise, lest as we 
proceed we become involved in dispute. If anyone 
should say of a man standing still but moving his 
hands and head that the same man is at the same time 
at rest and in motion we should not, I take it, regard 
that as the right way of expressing it, but rather 
that a part’ of him is atrest and a part inmotion. Is 
not that so?” “It is.” “Then if the disputant 
should carry the jest still further with the subtlety 
that tops at any rate? stand still as a whole at the same 
time that they are in motion when with the peg fixed 
in one point they revolve, and that the same is true of 
any other case of circular motion about the same spot 

© For this method of reasoning g. 478 p, 609 s, Laws 
896 c, Charm. 168 B-c, Gorg. 496 c, Phileb. 11 p-£. 

4 4v =** was all along and is.” 

* The maxim is applied to the antithesis of rest and ~ 
motion, so prominent in the dialectics of the day. Cf. 
Sophist 249 c-p, Parmen. 156 p and passim. 

1 Cf. Theaetet. 181 €. 

¢ The argumentative ye is controversial. For the illustra- 
tion of the top cf. Spencer, First Principles, § 170, who 
analyzes ‘certain oscillations described by the expressive 
though inelegant word ‘ wobbling ’” and their final dissipa- 
tion when the top appears stationary in the equilibrium 






drrodexoipeba, os od KaTa ravTa éavTa@v Ta 
Towabdra Tore jeevovToov Te Kal pepopeveny, add. 
datpev av éxew adta ed0U te Kal mepipepes ev 
adtots, Kal KaTa pev TO evOd éotdvat, oddayh yap 
droxNiveww, Kata 5€ TO mrepupepes Kine kwetobat: 
éray de THY evbuwpiar 7 7 eis deEvav 7) eis dpuorepay 
n «ls TO mpoobev H «ls TO omabev eyKaAin dua. 
Tepupepopevor, TOTE oddapyh éorw €oTdvat. Kat 
opbds ye, &pn. Ovddev dpa Huds tayv ToLvovTey 
Acydjrevov exTrAnger, ovde padov Tt meioel, as 
ToTé Ti av TO avTO Ov Gua KaTa TO adTO TpOS TO 
av7To Tdvavrio mao. 7 Kat ety 7 Ka Toujoevev. 
OdKouv € ewe ye, pn. “AA opens, iy & eyw, iva 
pH avaykaladpeba mdoas Tas TovavTas apuduo- 
Bnrjoes errefovres Kat BeBarodpevor ws ovK 
dAn Geis ovoas pndvew, brrobepevor os ToUTOV 
ovTwS eXovTos els TO mpoobev mpotwper, opo- 
Aoyjjoavres, edv more aAn dav tadra 7 Tavrn, 
TavTa. Hy Ta am0 ToUTOU fvpBatvovra Aedvpeva 
éccofar. “AAAa xp7y, €fn, TadTa zrovety. 

* The meaning is plain, the alleged rest and motion do 
not relate to the same parts of the objects. But the syntax 
of ra roira is difficult. Obvious remedies are to expunge 
the words or to read réy rowtrwy, the cacophony of which 
in the context Plato perhaps rejected at the cost of leaving 
his syntax to our conjectures. 

> Of. Aristot. Met. 1022 a 23 ér: 6é 7d KaOd 7d Kara Oéow 
Aéyerat, KaOd Ecryxer, etc. 

© elm, the reading of most mss., should stand. It covers 
the case of contradictory predicates, especially of relation, 
that do not readily fall under the dichotomy otciy rdoxeuv. 
So Phaedo 97 c 7 eivat } GdXo brioby rdoxew 7 Troveiv. 

4 audicByrices is slightly contemptuous. Cf. Aristot. supra, 
évoxAncers, and Theaetet. 158 c 76 ye dudicBnrica ob xaderdy, 

* It is almost a Platonic method thus to emphasize the 



—we should reject the statement on the ground that 
the repose and the movement in such cases * were not 
in relation to the same parts of the objects, but we 
would say that there was a straight line and a cir- 
cumference in them and that in respect of the straight 
line they are standing still® since they do not incline 
to either side, but in respect of the circumference 
they move in a circle; but that when as they revolve 
they incline the perpendicular to right or left or 
forward or back, then they are in no wise at rest.” 
“And that would be right,” he said. “No such 
remarks then will disconcert us or any whit the more 
make us believe that it is ever possible for the same 
thing at the same time in the same respect and the 
same relation to suffer, be,’ or do opposites.” “‘ They 
will not me, I am sure,” said he. “‘ All the same,” 
said I, “that we may not be forced to examine at 
tedious length the entire list of such contentions ¢ and 
convince ourselves that they are false, let us proceed 
on the hypothesis ¢ that this is so, with the understand- 
ing that, if it ever appear otherwise, everything that 
results from the assumption shall be invalidated.” 
“ That is what we must do,” he said. 

dependence of one conclusion on another already accepted. 
OF Unity of Plato’s Thought, n. 471, Polit. 284 pv, 

haedo 77 a, 92 pv, Tim. 51 pv, Parmen. 149 a. It may be 
used to cut short discussion (Unity of Plato’s Thought, 
n. 471) or divert it into another channel. Here, however, 
he is aware, as Aristotle is, that the maxim of contradiction 
can be proved only controversially against an adversary 
who says something (cf. my De Platonis Idearum Doctrina, 
pp. 7-9, Aristot. Met. 1012 b 1-10); and so, having suffi- 
ciently guarded his meaning, he dismisses the subject with 
the ironical observation that, if the maxim is ever proved 
false, he will give up all that he bases on the hypothesis 
of its truth. Cf. Sophist 247 5. 

VOL. I 2c 385 


B XIII. *Ap’ obv, jv 8 8 eyd, TO emwedew 7 
avavevew Kal 70 epico$ai twos daBeiv TO dn- 
apvetabau Kal TO mpoodyeabar TO dmwbetobar, mdvra 
Ta Toubra Trav evavtiwy av" aAAHAots Deins etre 
Tounpdrov cite Tabnudroov ; ovdev yap Tavry 
Swoicer, “AM”, 4S és, TOV evayrioy. Te obv; 
Hv & ey Saban Kal Trewin xal dAws Tas ému- 
Oupuias, Kat ad TO eOedew Kal TO BovAcoBar, ov 
mdvra Tatra els exeivd mou dy Deins Ta, €lOn Ta 

C viv 87) Aexbevra; olov det THv Tod émBupobvros 
yuynv odxt jrow edieobau prjoets exeivou ob dy 
emiOuyun, y] mpoodyeabau TotTo 6 dy _Bovdnrat ot 
yeveobar, 7] n ab, Kal? daov eJehev Th of Topiobivan, 
émuevelv Tobro mpos abriy aorep TWOS EpwT@VTOS, 
emopeyouevqy abTob Tijs YEVverems 5 "Eywye. Ti 
dal; 70 dBoudeiv Kat a) eOéAew pnd emBupety 
ovK ets TO dmeuBety Kal dmeAadvewv am’ adris Kal 

D eis amavra TdavavTia exetvous Onooper ; Ilds yap 
ov; Tod’rwy 87) ottws éexydvtTwy emibupidy te 

1 Baiter’s ay is of course necessary. 

* Cf. Gorg. 496 x, and supra on 435 v. 

> édé\ev in Plato normally means to be willing, and 
BotAec Oar to wish or desire. But unlike Prodicus, Plato 
emphasizes distinctions of synonyms only when relevant 
to his purpose. Cf. Unity of Plato’s Thought, p. 47 and 
n. 339, Phileb. 60 D. mpocdyeobat below relates to émribupia 
and érwwevew to ébé\ew . . . Bove Oar. 

¢ Cf. Aristot. De anima 434 a 9. The Platonic doctrine 
that opinion, ddga, is discussion of the soul with herself, or 
the judgement in which such discussion terminates (cf. 
Unity of Plato’s Thought, p. 47) is here applied to the 
specific case of the practical reason issuing in an affirmation 
of the will. 



_ XII. “ Will you not then,” said I, ‘‘ set down as 
opposed to one another assent and dissent, and the en- 
deavour aftera thing to the rejection of it, and embrac- 
ing to repelling—do not these and all things like these 
belong to the class of opposite actions or passions ; 
it will make no difference which?*” ‘“‘ None,” said 
he, “ but they are opposites.” “* What then,” said 
I, “ of thirst and hunger and the appetites generally, 
and again consenting ? and willing, would you not put 
them all somewhere in the classes just described ? 
. Will you not say, for example, that the soul of one 
who desires either strives for that which he desires 
or draws towards its embrace what it wishes to accrue 
to it; or again, in so far as it wills that anything 
be presented to it, nods assent to itself thereon as 
if someone put the question,® striving towards its 
attainment ?”’ ‘‘ I would say so,” he said. “ But what 
of not-willing ¢ and not consenting nor yet desiring, 
shall we not put these under the soul’s rejection * and 
repulsion from itself and generally into the opposite 
class from all the former?” “‘ Of course.” “ This 
being so, shall we say that the desires constitute a 

@ G8ovhew recalls the French coinage “ nolonté,” and the 
Southern mule’s “ won’t-power.” Cf. Epist. vii. 347 a, 
Demosth. Epist. ii. 17. 

* Cf. Aristotle’s av@&xew, De an. 433 b8. “All willing 
is either pushing or pulling,” Jastrow, Fact and Fable in 
Psychology, p. 336. Cf. the argument in Spencer's First 
Principles § 80, that the phrase “impelled by desires” is 
not a metaphor but a physical fact. Plato’s generalization 
of the concepts “‘ attraction” and “ repulsion” brings about 
a curious coincidence with the language of a materialistic, 
physiological psychology (cf. Lange, History of Materialism, 
passim), just as his rejection in the Timaeus of attraction 
and actio in distans allies his physics with that of the 
most consistent materialists. 





prjoopev elvat eldos, Kal evapyeardras abta&v 
TOUTWY IV TE _Bipav kahodpev kal iy mretvay 3 
Droopev, 4 8 ds. Odxotv tiv pev troTob, Thy 8 
edwdys; Nat. “Ap” obv, Ka?’ dcov diba cork, 
méovos av TWvos 7 ob Aéyoper emiBupiia ev TH 
puxh ein; olov dia é€orl dupa dpa ve Beppod 
ToTOU 7 puxpod, a) mood oT] odiyou, 7 Kal evi 
Aoyw Tow Twos TOMATO ; 7 €av pe ris 
Bepporns TO Sixper 7poon, Thy Tod yuxpod €m- 
Oupiav Tpoomapexor” av, eav de puxporns, THY 
Tob Depuod; éav dé dia 7AjOovs Tmapovatay TroAA) 
7 Safa 7 D THY TOO TodAob mapéterar, € édy de oniyns 
Tv Tod dXtyov; adro Sé To dSupiv od pH Tote 
aAXrov yéevntat éembupia 7 odrep méduxev, adtod 
mwpatos, Kal ad TO mewhv Bpwdpatos; Odrws, 
é¢n, adry ye  émOupia éxdotn adbrod pdvov 
éxdoTov ob méfpuKe, Tod Se Tolov 7 Tolov Ta 
mpooyryvopeva. Myror tis, hv 8° eyes, aoxémtous 
Has ovtas DopvByon, ws oddeis moTod emiBupet 

1 Several good mss. have the obviously wrong ov, others 

h ov. 

@ Cf. on 349 £. 

> Cf. supra 412 B and Class. Phil. vii. (1912) pp. 485-486. 

¢ The argument might proceed with 439 a rod diyavros 
dpa 7 yux%. All that intervenes is a digression on logic, a 
caveat against possible misunderstandings of the proposition 
that thirst gua thirst is a desire for drink only and un- 
qualifiedly. We are especially warned (438 a) against the 
misconception that since all men desire the good, thirst must 
be a desire not for mere drink but for good drink. Cf 
the dramatic correction of a misconception, Phaedo 79 Bs, 
infra 529 s-B. 

4 In the terminology of the doctrine of ideas the “ pre- 

sence’’ of cold is the cause of cool, and that of heat, of hot. 



elass* and that the most conspicuous members of 
that class’ are what we call thirst and hunger?” 
“We shall,” said he. ‘“‘Is not the one desire of 
drink, the other of food?” “‘ Yes.’ ‘‘ Theninso far 
as it is thirst, would it be of anything more than that 
of which we say it is a desire in the soul?* I mean is 
thirst thirst for hot drink or cold or much or little or 
in a word for a draught of any particular quality, or 
is it the fact that if heat 4 is attached ¢ to the thirst it 
would further render the desire—a desire of cold, and 
ifcold ofhot ? But if owing to the presence of much- 
ness the thirst is much it would render it a thirst for 
much and if little for little. But mere thirst will 
never be desire of anything else than that of which 
it is its nature to be, mere drink,’ and so hunger of 
food.’ ‘‘ That is so,” he said; ‘“‘ each desire in 
itself is of that thing only of which it is its nature to 
be. The epithets belong to the quality—such or 
such?” “ Let no one then,” ” said I, “ disconcert us 
when off our guard with the objection that everybody 
Cf. “The Origin of the Syllogism,” Class. Phil. vol. xix. 
p. 10. But in the concrete instance heat causes the desire 
of cool and vice versa. Cf. Phileb. 35 a éxiBupei tay évartiov 
h waoxet. 

If we assume that Plato is here speaking from the point 
of view of common sense (cf. Lysis 215 © 7d 62 Yuypdr Gepuod), 
there is no need of Hermann’s transposition of yvxpod and 
Gepuod, even though we do thereby get a more exact sym- 
metry with zA7Gous rapovelay . . . Tov rodXod below. 

* xpocy denotes that the * presence” is an addition. C/. 
mpocetm in Parmen. 149 k. 

? Phileb. 35 a adds a refinement not needed here, that 
thirst is, strictly speaking, a desire for repletion by drink. 

* Cf. 429 8. But (the desires) of such or such a 
(specific) drink are (due to) that added qualification (of 
the thirst). 

* uhro Tis=look you to it that no one, etc. 
: 389 


ana xpynoTod orod, Kal od oitov adda xpnoTod 
otrov. mdvres yap dpa Tov ayabdv eriBupobow 
et obv 1 Siba emBupiia €ori, xpnorod av «in cite 
TepaTos elite aAAov drou eoriy emBupia, Kal at 
ara ottw. “lows yap dy, édn, Soxot tl Adyew 6 6 
Tatra, Aéywr. "Aa pevrot, iy S° eyes, 60a A 
Be éort Towabra ofa elvai TOU, TA pev Tow. drra Tro.od 
Twos eoTw, ws epot Sonet, 7a 8 atta exaota 
abTod éxdoTou povov. Ov« euabov, éby. Od« 
enables, ednv, OTe TO peilov tovodrov éotw olov 
twos elvar petlov; dv ye. Odxodv rod éAdr- 
tovos; Nai. To d5€ ye odd petlov modd édar- 
tovos. 7 yap; Nat. *Ap’ odv kal to more 
petlov mote éAdtrovos, Kal TO éodpuevov petlov 
€gopevov eAdtrovos; “AAAd ti phy; 7 8 Gs. 
C Kai Ta. meta 57 mpos Ta eAdrrw Kal Ta Sumha- 
ova mpos Ta. jpicea Kal Tava Ta Towadra, Kat ab 
Baptrepa mpos Koupdrepa Kal Barren Tpos Ta. 
Bpadurepa, kal é7u ye Ta Oepa mpos Ta yuxpa Kal 

* dpa marks the rejection of this reasoning. Cf. supra 
358 c, 364 5, 381 ©, 499 c. Plato of course is not repudiat- 
ing his doctrine that all men really will the good, but the 
logic of this passage requires us to treat the esire of gond 
as a distinct qualification of the mere drink. 

> ca 7 éori rowafra etc.: a palmary example of the 
concrete simplicity of Greek idiom in the expression of 
abstract ideas. dca etc. (that is, relative terms) divide by 
partitive apposition into two classes, ra uév . . . 74 66. The 
meaning is that if one term of the relation is qualified, the 
other must be, but if one term is without qualification, the 
other also is taken absolutely. Plato, as usual (cf. supra-on 
347 8), represents the interlocutor as not understanding the 
first general abstract statement, which he therefore interprets 
and repeats, I have varied the translation in the repetition 



desires not drink but good drink and not food but 
good food, because (the argument will run“) all men 
desire good, and so, if thirst is desire, it would be 
of good drink or of good whatsoever it is; and so 
similarly of other desires.” ‘“‘ Why,” he said, “ there 
perhaps would seem to be something in that 
objection.” “‘ But I need hardly remind you,” said 
I, “ that of relative terms those that are somehow 
qualified are related to a qualified correlate, those 
that are severally just themselves to a correlate that 
is just itself.2 “I don’t understand,” he said. 
“Don’t you understand,” said I, “‘ that the greater ° 
is such as to be greater than something?” “‘ Cer- 
tainly.” “Is it not than the less?” “ Yes.” 
“ But the much greater than the much less. Is that 
not so?” “Yes.” “And may we add the one 
time greater than the one time less and that which 
will be greater than that which will be less?” 
“Surely.” ‘‘ And similarly of the more towards the 
fewer, and the double towards the half and of all like 
cases, and again of the heavier towards the lighter, 
the swifter towards the slower, and yet again of the 
hot towards the cold and all cases of that kind, 

in order to bring out the full meaning, and some of the 
differences between Greek and English idiom. 

© The notion of relative terms is familiar. Cf. Charm. 
167 ©, Theaetet. 160 a, Symp. 199 v-e, Parmen. 133 c ff., 
Sophist 255 pv, Aristot. Topics vi. 4, and Cat. v. It is 
expounded here only to insure the apprehension of the 
further point that the qualifications of either term of the 
relation are relative to each other. In the Politicus 283 f. 
Plato adds that the great and small are measured not only 
in relation to each other, but by absolute standards. Cf. 
Unity of Plato’s Thought, pp. 61, 62, and infra 531 a. 

4 xai...xalad.. . xaién ye etc. mark different classes 
of relations, magnitudes, precise quantities, the mechanical 
properties of matter and the physical properties. 

: 391 


mdvra 7a ToUToLs dpova dp’ odx ovrws exet; Have 
pev ovr. Té dé 7a mepl Tas emoT TLS ; ovx 6 
adres Tpdrr0s ; emeor npn _ bev abr? pabrwaros 
avTob emLoTnun éorly 2 OTov on) Set Oetvar THY 
emLOTILNY, emvoT npn d¢€ Tus Kal 7roud Ts 7roLoo 
D Twos Kat Twos. Aéywo be TO Towdvoe: ovK, érrevd7 
oikias épyactas _emarnpn eyeveTo, Suyy Ke TOV 
dMwv EmoTI LAY, WOTE otKodopuuK7 anbjvac; 
Ti pny; “Ap. ov T@ mod tis elvat, ola érépa 
oddepia Tov dM 5 Nai. Ovxodv émreu51) o.oo 
Twos, Kal avT? Troud TUS eyevero ; Kal at adda 
ovTw Téxvat TE Kal eTLOT Hat; “Eorw ovTw. 
XIV. Todro Toy, hv & eye, pad WHE Tore 
Bovrecbau Aéyew, el dpa viv enables, 6 ért doa. éorly 
ofa elvai tov, avra pev jove abrav povenv éotiv, 
E Trav be mody Twav Tov. arta. Kat ov Tt dey, 
ws, otwy av UE TowadTa Kal cor, ws dpa Kal Tay 
byvewa@v Kal voowo@v 7 emuornun bye, Kal 
voowdns Kal TOV KaK@v Kal Tav ayabav Karn ral 
aya” adn’ emedr) ovK avTob obrep enor nun 
eorly éyévero emioTHpn, aAAa rowod TWds, TOUTO 

* Plato does not wish to complicate his logic with meta- 
physics. The objective correlate of éricrjun is a difficult 
problem. In the highest sense it is the ideas. Cf. Parmen. 
134 a. 

But the relativity of éricrjun (Aristot. Top. iv. 1. 5) leads 
to psychological difficulties in Charm. 168 and to theological 
in Parmen. 134 c-r, which are waived by this phrase. 
Science in the abstract is of knowledge in the abstract, 
architectural science is of the specific knowledge called 
architecture. Cf. Sophist 257 c. 

> Of. Phileb. 37 o. 

¢ Of. Cratyl. 393 8, Phaedo 81 pv, and for the thought 
Aristot. Met. 1030 b 2 ff. The added determinants ” need 
not be the same. The study of useful things is not necessarily 



does not the same hold?” “ By all means.” “ But 
what of the sciences ?_ Is not the way of it the same ? 
Science which is just that, is of knowledge which is 
just that, or is of whatsoever? we must assume the 
correlate of science to be. But a particular science of 
a particular kind is of some particular thing of a 
particular kind. I mean something like this: As 
there was a science of making a house it differed from 
other sciences so as to be named architecture.” 
“ Certainly.” “ Was not this by reason of its being 
of a certain kind ® such as no other of all the rest?” 
“Yes.” “ And was it not because it was of some- 
thing of a certain kind that it itself became a certain 
kind of science? And similarly of the other arts 
and sciences?” ‘‘ That is so.” 

XIV. “ This then,” said I, “ if haply you now under- 
stand, is what you must say I then meant, by the state- 
ment that of all things that are such as to be of some- 
thing, those that are just themselves only are of things 
just themselves only, but things of a certain kind are of 
things of akind. And I don’t at all mean¢ that they 
are of the same kind as the things of which they are, 
so that we are to suppose that the science of health 
and disease is a healthy and diseased science and that 
of evil and good, evil and good. I only mean that as 
science became the science not of just the thing? of 
which science is but of some particular kind of thing, 

a useful study, as opponents of the Classics argue. In Gorg. 
476 8 this principle is violated by the wilful fallacy that if to 
do justice is fine, so must it be to suffer justice, but the 
motive for this is explained in Laws 859-860. 

# abrod obrep éxicriun écriv is here a mere periphrasis for 
“abjparos, abrod expressing the idea abstract, mere, absolute, 
or per se, but érep or frep écrly is often a synonym of airés 
or airy in the sense of abstract, absolute, or ideal. Cf. 
Thompson on Meno 71 3, Sophist 255 pv rodro Srep éoriv elvat, 




> na 
& jv byrewov Kal vooddes, mova 5H tis EvveBy Kat 
atTn yevéobar, Kat toiro avriy émoince pnKeére 
> /, ¢ ~ a > A ~ “A A 
émuoTHnunv aTA@s Kkadciobar, adAa Tob trovod Twos 
mpooyevotévov iarpiknv. “Ewabov, edn, Kat pow 
a“ M4 wv \ A A ~ Ss tae J tA > 
oe? odtTws exew. To dé 57) dixpos, Hv 8° eyw, ov 
tovtwv Onoes tav Twos elvar TodTO Gmep eoTiv; 
” ~ 
éott d€ Syov Sibos; "Eywye, 4 8 ds+ madpatos 
~ ~ A 
ye. Odxoby rood pév Twos mwpatos Toy TL Kat 
By dt 5” > > A ” MA ~ ” AC 
ixjos, Sixbos 8’ odv adto ovte moAAOb ove dAtyou, 
” ~ ~ ~ 
ovte ayalod ovre Kakod, 00d’ Evi Adyw TroLob TOs, 
> > A a 
GAN’ adbtod mwpatos povov adro dios mépuKev; 
Il / A og T ~ 8 ~ ” c / 
avtarac. pev odv. Tod dubdvros dpa 7 pux7, 
a” a \ 
Kal” dcov dubq, odk aAAo Tt BovAeTou 7 mHEiv, Kat 
lo) ~ ~ / 
TovtTouv dpéyerar Kat emt Toro opuad. Afrov 87. 
Odxodv «i word tt adriv avOdAKker Supdoayv, ETEpov 
” ~ cod ~ ~ 
av tu ev adrH eln adtod Tod Supavtos Kal ayovros 
oe a / 
worep Onpiov emi TO meiv; od yap 5H, paper, 

* 54 marks the application of this digression on relativity, 
for dios is itself a relative term and is what it is in relation 
to something else, namely drink. 

> rdv tiwds elvac: if the text is sound, elvac seems to be 
taken twice, (1) with rodro etc., (2) ray tivds as predicates. 
This is perhaps no harsher than 72 doxeiv etvac in Aesch. Ag. 
788. Cf. Tennyson’s 

How sweet are looks that ladies bend 
On whom their favours fall, 
and Pope’s 
And virgins smiled at what they blushed before. 

Possibly 0jcecs rdv tivds is incomplete in itself (ef. 437 B) and 
elvac Tovro etc. is a loose epexegesis. The only emendation 
worth notice is Adam’s insertion of xal twds between twos 
and elva:, which yields a smooth, but painfully explicit, 

¢ Cf. further Sophist 255 pv, Aristot. Met. 1021 a 27, 
Aristot. Cat. v., Top. vi. 4. So Plotinus vi. 1. 7 says that 



namely, of health and disease, the result? was that 
it itself became some kind of science and this caused 
it to be no longer called simply science but with the 
addition of the particular kind, medical science.” 
“I understand,” he said, “‘ and agree that it is so.” 
“To return to thirst, then,” said I, “ will you not 
class it with the things® that are of something and 
say thatit is whatit is ° in relation to something—and 
it is, I presume, thirst?” “I will,” said he, ‘‘— 
namely of drink.” “Then if the drink is of a certain 
kind, so is the thirst, but thirst that is just thirst is 
neither of much nor little nor good nor bad, nor in a 
word of any kind, but just thirst is naturally of just 
drink only.” “‘ By all means.” “The soul of the 
thirsty then, in so far as it thirsts, wishes nothing else 
than to drink, and yearns for this and its impulse is 
towards this.’”’ “Obviously.” “Then if anything 
draws it back? when thirsty it must be something 
different in it from that which thirsts and drives it 
like a beast * to drink. For it cannot be, we say, that 

relative terms are those whose very being is the relation kat 
70 elvat ox GdXo Tt H Td GAARA elvar. 
_ # Cf. on 437 c, Aristot. De an. 433 b 8, Laws 644 x, infra 
604 8, Phaedr. 238 c. The practical moral truth of this is 
independent of our metaphysical psychology. Plato means 
that the something which made King David refuse the 
draught panchaned” by the blood of his soldiers and Sir 
Philip Sidney pass the cup to a wounded comrade is some- 
how different from the animal appetite which it overpowers. 
Cf. Aristot. Eth. Nic. 1102 b 24, spies 863 FE. ¥ 

* Cf. infra 589, Epist. 335 8. Cf. Deseartes, Les Passions 
de l’dme, article xlvii: “*En quoi consistent les combats 
qu’on a coutume d’imaginer entre la partie inférieure et la 
supérieure de l’Ame.” He -says in effect that the soul is a 
unitand the‘ lowersoul” isthe body. Cf. ibid. Ixviii, where 
he rejects the “ concupiscible ’’ and the “ irascible.” 



/ A ~ ~ ~ 
TO ye abto TH abt@ éavtod wept 7d adtd dpa 
> / 
Tavavria mpatre. Od yap obv. “Qozep ye, olwat, 
Tod to€drov od Kadds exer Aéyew, Ste avToD dua 
¢ a lol 
al xeipes TO THLov amwHobvrai Te Kal mpooeAKovTat, 
GAN’ av AAA A € > 4] ~ / ern BY ec 
ott adAn pev 7 amwhotoa xelp, érépa Se 7 
C mpocayopuévn. Ilavrdzact peév odv, edn. Idrepov 
\ ~ ~ 207 
d7) ddpev twas €otw dre Subavras odK ebédew 
meiv; Kai pdda y’, bn, moAdods Kai mroAdakts. 
/ > ” > 
Te obv, edynv ey, dain Tis av TovTwv mépt; ovK 
~ ~ ~ n lol > ~ 
evetvat pev ev TH ux alt@v 7rd Kededov, eveivar 
\ ~ a ~ ~ 4 
dé 7d KwAdov meEiv, GAAO Ov Kai Kparobv TOD KEAev- 
” ” PS > 4% hn By A 
ovros; “Epouye, én, Soxet. *Ap’ odv od TO pev 
~ ~ > 
KwAdov Ta ToLabra eyylyverat, dtav eyylyvnTat,” €K 
~ 4 
D Aoyropod, 7a 8é dyovra Kal €AKovra Sia TAaOnudTwv 
TE Kal voonudtwy mapaylyvera; Daiverar. Od 
\ 4 
57) dAdyws, jv S éeyd, déubcopev adra dittd TE 
Vier > , ‘ \ ® , 
Kat €tepa adAAjAwy elva, To pev @ Aoyilerat 
~ =~ A \ e 
AoytoriKdv mpocayopetovres THs puxiis, TO SE @ 
1 So Ast for ms. tpdrroc—necessarily, unless we read with 

Campbell dy’ av. 
2 So Schneider; cf. 373 E: éyyévnra codd. 

@ Cf. Unity of Plato’s Thought, p. 68: ‘Plato... de- 
lights to prick . . . the bubbles of imagery, rhetoric and 
antithesis blown by his predecessors. Heraclitus means well 
when he says that the one is united by disunion (Symp. 187 a) 
or that the hands at once draw and repel the bow. But the 
epigram vanishes under logical analysis.” 

For the conceit ¢f. Samuel Butler’s lines: 

He that will win his dame must do 
As love does when he bends his bow, 
With one hand thrust his lady from 
And with the other pull her home. 

> évetvar wev . . . évetvan dé: the slight artificiality of the 
anaphora matches well with the Gorgian jingle xeXedov . . - 



the same thing with the same part of itself at the same 
time acts in opposite ways about the same thing.” 
“We must admit that it does not.” “So I fancy it 
is not well said of the archer? that his hands at the 
same time thrust away the bow and draw it nigh, 
but we should rather say that there is one hand that 
puts it away and another that draws it to.” “ By 
allmeans,”’ he said. ‘‘ Are we tosay, then, that some 
men sometimes though thirsty refuse to drink?” 
“We are indeed,” he said, “many and often.” 
** What then,” said I, “ should one affirm about them ? 
Is it not that there is® a something in the soul that 
bids them drink and a something that forbids, a 
different something that masters that which bids ? ” 
“T think so.” “ And is it not the fact that that which 
inhibits such actions arises when it arises from the 
calculations of reason, but the impulses which draw 
and drag come through affections* and diseases ?” 
“ Apparently.” ‘‘ Not unreasonably,” said I, “ shall 
we claim that they are two and different from one 
another, naming that in the soul whereby it reckons 
and reasons the rational ¢ and that with which it loves, 

kwriov. Cf. Ilambl. Protrept. p. 41 Postelli or: yap rovobtrov 
6 xedever Kal kwdvet. 

¢ The * pulls”’ are distinguished verbally from the passions 
that are their instruments. voonudrwy suggests the Stoic 
doctrine that passions are diseases. Cf. Cic. Tuse. iii. 4 
perturbationes, and passim, and Phileb. 45 c. 

4 Noyorixéy is one of Plato’s many synonyms for the in- 
tellectual (Seb ot Cf. 441 c, 571 c, 587 vp, 605 B. It em- 
phasizes the moral calculation of consequences, as opposed 
to blind passion. Cf. Crito 46 B (one of the passages which 
the Christian apologists used to prove that Socrates knew 
the Adyos), Theaetet. 186 c dvadoyicuata mpds re odciavy xal 
ddérecay, and Laws 644. Aristot. Hth. 1139 a 12 somewhat 



7 A \ lal a z 
€pa Te Kat mewh Kal Subf Kal mepl tas daAdas 
> , > { 
emOupias enrdéntat addyvorov Te Kal emiOupnrikdv, 
TAnpwcewv Twwv Kal ASovav ératpov. OvK, adr’. 
> oF ” ¢ , > ” 4 ~ A 
eiKoTws, edn, nyoiuel’ dv otrws. Tatra pev 
/ a 
towvr, jv 8 éeya, dvo hiv dpicbw «idn ev puxA 
ae A A de 8 \ ~ @ a“ \ ol Q / 6. 
evovta: To de 579 Tob Ovpod Kal  Ovpodpcla 
© 7 : 
/ / ” e / 
TOTEpoVv TpiTov % ToUTwWY ToTépw av Ein dpmodvEes; 
” ” ~ = fA \\?- 
lows, €fn, TH Eérépw, TH eriOvpntuxd. °AA’, 
“e > ce? 
qv 8° ey, moré akovoas Tt moredw TovTwW, WS 
apa Aeovrios 6 ’AyAaiwvos avudv éx Teipacéws 
\ A \ 
bao To Bdpevov tetxyos éxrds, alabduevos vexpovds 
a , ~ cal 
Tapa T@ Snpiw Keysevous, dua pev ideiv emvBvpot, 
7 Ss = § Tks / ¢ , . 
dua d ad dvayepaivor Kal dmotpémot éavTov, Kat 

* érrénrac: almost technical, as in Sappho’s ode, for the 
flutter of desire. ddéy:crov, though applied here to the 
ervOuunrixéy only, suggests the bipartite division of Aristotle, 
Eth, Nic. 1102 a 28. 

® So the bad steed which symbolizes the ériOugyrixéy in 
Phaedr. 253 & is dagovelas ératpos. 

¢ We now approach the distinctively Platonic sense of 
6vuds as the power of noble. wrath, which, unless perverted 
by a bad education, is naturally the ally of the reason, 
though as mere angry passion it might seem to belong to 
the irrational part of the soul, and so, as Glaucon suggests, 
be akin to appetite, with which it is associated in the mortal 
soul of the Timaeus 69 v. en 

In Laws 731 B-c Plato tells us again that the soul cannot 
combat injustice without the capacity for righteous indigna- 
tion. The Stoics affected to deprecate anger always, and the 
difference remained a theme of controversy between them 
and the Platonists. Cf. Schmidt, thik der Griechen, ii. pp. 
321 ff., Seneca, De ira, i. 9, and passim. Moralists are still 
divided on the point. Cf. Bagehot, Lord Brougham: ** An- 
other faculty of Brougham . . . is the faculty of easy anger. 



hungers, thirsts, and feels the flutter? and titillation 
of other desires, the irrational and appetitive— 
companion® of various repletions and pleasures.” 
“ Tt would not be unreasonable but quite natural,” he 
said, “‘for us to think this.” ‘‘ These two forms, 
then, let us assume to have been marked off as 
actually existing inthe soul. But now the Thumos® 
or principle of high spirit, that with which we feel 
anger, is it a third, or would it be identical in nature 
with one of these?”’ “ Perhaps,” he said, “ with 
one of these, the appetitive.” ‘“‘ But,” I said, “I 
once heard a story? which I believe, that Leontius the 
son of Aglaion, on his way up from the Peiraeus under 
the outer side of the northern wall,* becoming aware 
of dead bodies’ that lay at the place of public execu- 
tion at the same time felt a desire to see them and a 
repugnance and aversion, and that for a time he 

The supine placidity of civilization is not favourable to ani- 
mosity [Bacon's word for @uués].”” Leslie Stephen, Science of 
Ethics, pp. 60 ff. and p. 62, seems to contradict Plato: ** The 
supposed conflict between reason and passion is, as I hold, 
meaningless if it is taken to imply that the reason isa 
faculty separate from the emotions,” etc. But this is onl 
i metaphysics. On the practical ethical issue he is wi 

@ Socrates has heard and trusts a, to us, obscure anecdote 
which shows how emotion may act as a distinct principle re- 
buking the lower appetites or curiosities. Leontius is un- 
known, except for Bergk’s guess identifying him with the 
Leotrophides of a corrupt fragment of Theopompus Comicus, 
fr. 1 Kock, p. 739. 

* He was following the outer side of the north wall up to 
the city. Cf. Lysis 203 a, Frazer, Paus. ii. 40, Wachsmuth, 
Stadt Athen, i. p. 190. 

4 The corpses were by, near, or with the executioner (6 ém? 
7T@~ dpiyyar:) whether he had thrown them into the pit 
(Sapa@por) or not. 



440 Téws pdxouro Te Kat mapakadvntouTo, Kparou- 
pevos 8° obdv bd Tis emBupias, SieAxdoas Tovs 
opbahwovs, Tpoodpapicny m™pos Tovs vexpous, idov 
dpiv, pn, @ Kakodaimoves, eumrAnoOnre Tob Kadob 
Oeduaros. Hxovoa, eon, Kal avrds. Odros pev- 
ToL, edn, 6 Adyos onpatver THY opynv mrohepetv 
eviore tals émBupiars ws dAdo dv GAAw. Lnpaives 

XV. Odcoiv Kai ado, ednv, troMaxod at- 
oBavopcba, 6 orav Bidlwvrat Twa. mapa Tov Aoytopov 
B emGupiat, Aowopobyrad TE abrov Kat Qupovpevov 
T@ Pralopevw ev adr, Kat aomep dvoiv oracia- 
tovrow Evppaxov TO Ady yuyvopevov TOV Ovupov 
Tob Towovrou ; tats 8 eruptions avrov Kowa 
vioavra, atpodvros Adyouv pa) Seiv, dvrumparrew, 
olwat de ovk av davat yevopevov more ev cavT® 
TOO TovovTov aicBécbat, ofuat 8° odd’ ev w. 
C Od pd tov Ata, édn. Te 8; hv & eyes oTav 
TUS olnrat abiwatr ody dow av yevvarorepos > 
ToaouTw rrov dvvarat dpyileobat Kal mew@v Kal 
pry@v Kal GAAo driwbdv TOV ToLwodTwY macxwv dT 
* Cf. Antiph. fr. 18 Kock mhnyels, réws wev érexpdrer Tijs 
cuppopas, etc., and 
Maids who shrieked to see the heads 
Yet shrieking pressed more nigh. 

> He apostrophizes his eyes, | in a different style from 
Romeo's, *‘ Eyes, look your last.” 

* airév: we shift from the @uués to the man and back again. 

4 dvrurpdrrew: that is, oppose the reason. It may be 
construed with dev or as the verb of airév. There are no 
real difficulties in the passage, though many have been 
found. The order of words and the anacoluthon are inten- 
tional and effective. Cf. supra on 434 c. otc dv... moré 
is to literal understanding an exaggeration, But Plato is 



resisted* and veiled his head, but overpowered in 
despite of all by his desire, with wide staring eyes 
he rushed up to the corpses and cried, ‘There, ye 
wretches,” take your fill of the fine spectacle!” 
“I too,” he said, “ have heard the story.” “ Yet, 
surely, this anecdote,” I said, “ signifies that the 
principle of anger sometimes fights against desires as 
ae thing against. an alien.” “ Yes, it does,” he 

XV. “And do we not,” said I, “ on many other occa- 
sions observe when his desires constrain a man con- 
trary to his reason that he reviles himself and is angry 
with that within which masters him ; and that as it 
were in a faction of two parties the high spirit of such 
a man becomes the ally of his reason? But its® 
making common cause? with the desires against the 
reason when reason whispers low ¢ ‘ Thou must not ’"— 
that, I think, is a kind of thing you would not affirm 
eyer to have perceived in yourself, nor, I fancy, in any- 
body else either.” “‘ No, by heaven,” he said. “Again, 
when a man thinks himself to be in the wrong, is it 
not true that the nobler he is the less is he capable of 
anger though suffering hunger and cold? and what- 

speaking of the normal action of uncorrupted @vués. Plato 
would not accept the psychology of Euripides’ Medea 

kal paxOdyw pév ola Spay wé\d\w Kaka, 

Bupds 6é xpeicow Tov Eudy SovdevudTwr, 
Cf. Dr. Loeb’s translation of Décharme, p. 340. 

* aipotyros: cf. 604 c, and L. & S. s.v. A. um. 5. 

t So Aristot. Rhet. 1380 B 17 od yi-yreras yap 7 épyh rpds 73 
dixaov, and Eth. Nic. 1135 b 28 émi gawouéry yap détxia 
7 Seri éoTw. ioe is true only with dea reservation 
“yevvasdrepos. e baser type is angry when in the wrong. 

* Cf. Demosth. xy. 10 for the same general idea. 

VOL. I 2D 401 


e€xeivov, dv adv olntat dixaiws tadra dSpav, Kal, 6 

Aéyw, odk eféAeu mpds Tobrov adtod eyeipecbar 6 
Oupos; °AAnOA, edn. Ti dé; drav dduKxetabai tis 
NyhTaL, odK ev todTw Cet re Kat xaNerraiver kal 
Cuppaxed 7@ Soxoovrt Sucaiep kal dia TO mew yy 
«at dua TO puyodv Kal mavra, Ta ToLadTa mdoxew 
drropeveny Kal viKa Kal op Anyer TOY aus 
mpiv av i) Svampdénrae 7 7 TeAevTAOD 7) Borep dev 
v0 vowews bd TOO Adyou Tob Tap avT@ dva- 
KAn Geis EpaivO7 ; ILave pev ovr, edn, € E0LKE Toure 
@ Aéyets, Kalrou y ev Th TMETEpy moNeu TOUS 
emuKxovpous _@omep Kuvas eOéucba sanKdous Tay 
dpxovrev aomep TroyLeveny modews. Kadds yap, 
nv & ey, voets 6 BovAopat Aéyew. adr F mpos 

1 ToUTw Kal 700¢ buys ; To Trotov ; “Ort Tobvav- 
tiov 7 dpriws Hiv daivera Trepl Tob Bupoerdoos. 
TOTE prev yap emOuvpytiKdv Tt adTo dopeba <lvat, 
viv d€ moAdob Seiv paper, aAXG. mond pGAAov aro 
ev TH THs puyfs ordoe tiecba Ta oma mpos TO 
AoyuoruKov. llavrdmracw, epn. “Ap” oby Erepov 
ov Kal TovToU, 7) AoyroruKob Tt €lOos, wore pay 
tpia adAd dvo €ldn eivar ev uy, AoyroTuKOY Kat 

a6 Neyo idiomatic, ‘*as I was saying.” 

> éy TOUT : , Possibly “in such an one,” pa ar? “in 
such a case.” @vuds is plainly the subject of fet. (Cf. the 
Dhyana definition in Aristot. De an. 403 a 31 féow rod 
mepi Thy kapdlay aiwaros), and so, strictly speaking, of all 
the other verbs down to Ajyer. kal dud 7d weviy .. . wdoxew 
is best taken as a parenthesis giving an additional reason 
for the anger, besides the sense of injustice. 

° rév yevvale : a.e. the @uués of the noble, repeating gow 
av yevvarérepos 7 above. The interpretation ‘* does not desist 
from his noble (acts)” destroys this symmetry and has no 



soever else at the hands of him whom-he believes to 
be acting justly therein, and as I say? his spirit refuses © 
to be aroused against such aone?” “True,” he said. 
“But what when a man believes himself to be 
wronged, does not his spirit in that case ® seethe and 
grow fierce (and also because of his suffering hunger, 
cold and the like) and make itself the ally of what he 
judges just, and in noble souls * it endures and wins 
the victory and will not let go until either it achieves 
its purpose, or death ends all, or, as a dog is called 
back by a shepherd, it is called back by the reason 
within and calmed.” “ Your similitude is perfect,” 
he said, “* and it confirms ? our former statements that 
the helpers are as it were dogs subject to the rulers 
who are as it were the shepherds of the city.””. ““You 
apprehend my meaning excellently,” said I. “ But 
do you also take note of this?” “Of what?” 
“ That what we now think about the spirited element 
is just the opposite of our recent surmise. For then 
we supposed it to be a part of the appetitive, but now, 
far from that, we say that, in the factions ¢ of the soul, . 
it much rather marshals itself on the side of the 
reason.” ‘‘ By all means,” he said. “Is it then 
distinct from this too, or is it a form of the rational, so 
that there are not three but two kinds in the soul, 

warrant in Plato’s use of yervaios. Cf. 375 ©, 459 a. The 
only argpmnestt against the view here taken is that “@uués 
is not the subject of A7yer,” which it plainly is. The shift 
from @vuzés to the man in what follows is no difficulty and 
is required only by redevticy, which may well be a gloss. 
Cf. A.J.P. xvi. p. 237. 

4 xairo ye calls attention to the confirmation supplied by 
the image. Cf. supra on 376 B, and my article in Class. 
Journ. vol. iii. p. 29. 

* Cf. 440 B and Phaedr. 237 &. 



emibvpntidv; 7 Kabdarep ev TH moda Evvetyev 
441 airny tpia dvta yévn, xpnuatioTiKdv, emuKoupy- 
TUCOY, Bovdevtixov, ovrw kal ev puyh tpirov TOOTS 
€oTt TO _Gupoewdes, émixoupov dv TH AoyioTiKa 
pvoe, €av 41) imo KaKAS | Tpopis Svapbaph ; : 
*Avaykn, €n, Tpitov. Nai, 7 hv & eyes, av ye Too 
Aoyrarucod dAAo Tt pavy aomep Tod emOupnriKod 
edavn érepov ov, *AAN od xademdv, edn, davfvat. 
Kal yap ev Tots mraudious TOUTO y dy Tis lool, OTL 
Bvpob yey evOds yevopneva preata €or, Aopopod 
BS no pev éuovye Soxodow oddérore peraAap- 
Bavew, ot 5é moAXoi dé tore. Nai pa AV, jv 8 
eyw, KaAds ye eles. Eri 5 ev Tots Onpiows av Tis 
idot 6 Adyeus, Ste OUTWS exer. mpds 5€ TOUTOIs Kal 
6 dvw mov eke eizopev, TO TOO ‘Oprpou paptu- 
pyoer, TO 

oTn0os Sé mAngas Kpadinv jvirame pve 

evrabia yap 87) cad@s as ETEpov ETEpw emu )ijrrov 

C zremoinxev “Opmpos TO dvahoytodpevov mepl Tod 
BeAtiovds Te Kal yeipovos TH dAoyiotws Oupoupevw. 
Komtii edn, dpbas Aéyets. 

XVI. Tatra pev dpa, Hv 8 eyw, poyis dua- 
vevevKapev, Kal jp emuerks oporoyetrar, Ta 
avra pev ev moXev, To abra eS év €vos EkdoTov TH 
yoxh yen evetvar Kal toa tov apiyov. “Eort 

@ It still remains to distinguish the \oy:orixéy from Oupds, 
which is done first by pointing out that young children 
and animals possess @uyés (ef. Laws 963 5, Aristot. Pol. 
1334 b 22 ff.), and by quoting a line of Homer already 
cited in 390 p, and used in Phaedo 94 ©, to prove that 
the soul, regarded there as a unit, is distinct from the 



the rational and the appetitive, or just as in the 
city there were three existing kinds that composed 
its structure, the money-makers, the helpers, the 
counsellors, so also in the soul there exists a third 
kind, this principle of high spirit, which is the helper 
of reason by nature unless it is corrupted by evil 
nurture?” “We have to assume it as a third,” he 
said. “Yes,” said I, “ provided? it shall have been 
shown to be something different from the rational, 
as it has been shown to be other than the appetitive.” 
“That is not hard to be shown,” he said; “ for 
that much one can see in children, that they are from 
their very birth chock-full of rage and high spirit, 
but as for reason, some of them, to my thinking, 
never participate in it, and the majority quite late.” 
“Yes, by heaven, excellently said,” I replied; “ and 
further, one could see in animals that what you say 
is true. And to these instances we may add the 
testimony of Homer quoted above: 

He smote his breast and chided thus his heart, 

For there Homer has clearly represented that in us 
which has reflected about the better and the worse 
as rebuking that which feels unreasoning anger as if 
it were a distinct and different thing.” ‘‘ You are 
entirely right,” he said. 

XVI. ‘“‘ Through these waters, then,” said I, “‘ we 
have with difficulty made our way and we are fairly 
agreed that the same kinds equal in number are to be 
found in the state and in the soul of each one of us.”’ 

passions, there treated as prey to the body, like the 
= soul of the Timaeus. See Unity of Plato's Thought, 
pp. 42-43. 

® Cf. Parmen. 137 a, Pindar, Ol. xiii. 114 éxvetcat. 




a > a 2 a » ee a Li: 
Tatra. Ovdxotv éxeivd ye dn davayKaiov, ws 

/ \ ‘ e 4 ‘ A >? , ‘ 
7ohis jv cody Kat O, ovrw Kal Tov iSubTnv Kal 

\ > ca 
TOUT@ oopov elvan; ‘Té pays Kat & 8&7) dv8petos 
iSuebrns Kal ws, ToUTy Kal mk dvSpetav kal 
ovTws, Kal TadAa mdvTa mpds apeTnY WoatTws 
> / uv > / ‘ ‘ + > 
auddotepa exew. “Avaykyn. Kat dixasov On, 7) 
Dradicoov, olmat, pijoopev avipa elvar TH adT@ 
TpoTe, @mep Kat modus ay Suxcata.. Kai Todo 
méoa avayken. “AX” ov amy pv TotTo ém- 
AcAjopcba, dru exeivn ye TH TO €avtod Exactov ev 
adTh mpatTew TpiOv dvTwv yevOv dixaia Hv. OB 
pou Soxodper, epn, emrchjobar. Mynpovevréov 
dpa Hiv, ore kal TpOv ExaoTos, drov av Ta adrod 
ExaoTov TOV év at’T@ mpatrn, odtos Sikaids Te 
” \ A ¢ ~ / ‘ 4 > @ 
€oTalt Kal TA adTod mpdtTwv. Kai pada, 4 8’ Gs, 
pvnpovevtéov. OdKkodv 7H pev AoyroTiKa apyew 
TMpoonKe, coh@ OvTt Kal exovTe Thv dep dmdons 
THIS puxis mpounbevav, T@ Se Ovproedet danKow 
elvar kal Evupayw tovtov; [lav ye. *Ap’ odv 
lod \ 
ovy, Wamep eAeyouev, pmovatKis Kal yupvaotiKfs 
Kpaots Evudwva avTda Towjoet, TO ev EemiTEtvovaa 
a / 
Kal Tpépovoa Adyous TE xahois Kat pabjuact, TO 
< / 
d€ avicioa mapapvlovpern, jpepodoa dppovia TE 
oy Ld 

Kal pv0ua; Kopwd4_ ye, 4 8 Os. Kat TouTw 87) 
ovTw tpadévTe Kal Ws aAnbds Ta adtav pabdvre 
Kal madevbévre mpootatyicerov’ Tob emibupntiKod, 
6 817 mActotov tis Wuyis ev EéExdotw é€otl Kal 

1 Bekker’s rpocrarjcerov is better than the ms. mpoor7- 

@ Cf. 435 B. 
> Cf. Meno 73 c, Hipp. Major 295 pv. A virtual synonym 
for 7@ atr@ elie., Meno 72 £. 



“ That is so.” “ Then does not the necessity of our 
former postulate immediately follow, that as and 
whereby * the state was wise so and thereby is the 
individual wise?”’ “Surely.” “ And so whereby and 
as the individual is brave, thereby and so is the state 
brave, and that both should have all the otherconstitu- 
ents of virtue in the same way®?” “ Necessarily.” 
“ Just too, then, Glaucon, I presume we shall say a 
man is in the same way in which a city was just.” 
“That too is quite inevitable.” ‘“‘ But we surely 
cannot have forgotten this, that the state was just 

reason of each of the three classes found in it ful- 
filling its own function.” “I don’t think we have 
forgotten,” he said. “‘We must remember, then, 
that each of us also in whom ¢ the several parts within 
him perform each their own task—he will be a just 
man and one who minds his own affair.” “*‘ We must 
indeed remember,” he said. “ Does it not belong to 
the rational part to rule, being wise and exercising 
forethought in behalf of the entire soul, and to the 
principle of high spirit to be subject to this and its 
ally?” “Assuredly.” “ Then is it not, as we said,? 
the blending of music and gymnastics that will 
render them concordant, intensifying and fostering 
the one with fair words and teachings and relaxing 
and soothing and making gentle the other by har- 
mony and rhythm?” “ Quite so,” said he. “And 
these two thus reared and having learned and been 
educated to do their own work in the true sense of 
the phrase,* will preside over the appetitive part 
which is the mass’ of the soul in each of us and the 

© grov: cf. 431 B od, and 573 p &». @ Cf. 411 £, 4124. 

* Cf. supra on 433 B-£, infra 443 p, and Charm. 161 B. 
? Cf. on 431 a-s, Laws 689 a-s. 


Xpnudtwv dvoer amAnotdtatov: 6 THpHoeETOV, 11) 
T® triptracba tdv mepi TO cua Kadovpevwv 
7Sovav mod Kal toxupov ‘yevopevov odK ad Ta av- 
B 708 mparrn aAAa katabovhicacbar kal dpxew 
emexerpyon &v od mpoojkov att@ yéver, kal cup 
mavra. Tov Blov mdvrw dvarpéyn. Ildvu pev 
obv, edn. “Ap obv, nv 8 éyw, Kat Tods elebev 
mroAeptous TOUTW av kddAvora purarroirny _Umep 
andons Tis puxijs TE Kat TOO owparos, 70 pev 
BovAcvopevor, To Se mpomroAepody, € é7ropevov dé TO 
Gpxovre Kal TH avopeia émuteAody Ta BovAevdevra.; ; 
“Eore TavTa. Kai dvOpetov 57), oljan, Tour TO 
C pépet Kadodpev eva Exaoror, orav avTod TO bv 
ewdes Stacwly dia te AUTAV Kai Hdovav To tra 
Tod Adyou mapayyeAbev Sewodv re Kai pH. “"Opbds 
y’, edn. Loddv 5é ye exeivew 7TH opiKp@ péper, 
TS 6 Hpxé 7 ev at’T@ kal radra maphyyede, 
€xov av KaKeivo emioTyunv ev adt@ tHhv Tod Evp- 
héepovTos ExdoTw Te Kal Aw TH Kow@ adav adtav 
T pay ovTwv. Have pev ovv. Ti dé; oudpova 
D od 7H pirig Kal Evppuvia Th avrav ToUTw, OTav 
TO TE Gpyov Kal T@ dpxopevey TO Aoyroruxov 
dpodoé@or Seiv _apxew Kal py oracdlwow are ; 
Lwdpoovvyn yotv, 4 S ds, od« dAdo ti eoTw 7 

¢ Strictly speaking, pleasure is in the mind, not in the 
body. Cf. Unity of Plato’s Thought, n. 330. Kxadouuérwv 
implies the doctrine of the Gorgias 493 x, 494 c, Phileb. 
42 oc, Phaedr. 258 ©, and infra 583 B-584 a, that the 
pleasures of appetite are not pure or real. Cf. Unity 
of Plato’s Thought, n. 152. Cf. on Aeyouévwv 431 ©. 

> Cf. on 426 £, 606 B. 

° rpocfKkov: sc, éorlv dpxew. ‘yévet, by affinity, birth or 
nature. Cf. 4448. gq reads yevar. 



most insatiate by nature of wealth. They will keep 
watch upon it, lest, by being filled and infected with 
the so-called pleasures associated with the body ? and 
so waxing big and strong, it may not keep to” its own 
work but may undertake to enslave and rule over the 
classes which it is not fitting © that it should, and so 
overturn? the entire life of all.” “ By all means,” 
he said. “‘ Would not these two, then, best keep 
guard against enemies from without ¢ also in behalf of 
the entire soul and body, the one taking counsel.’ the 
other giving battle, attending upon the ruler, and by 
its courage executing the ruler’s designs?” “‘ That 
is so.” ‘‘ Brave, too, then, I take it, we call each in- 
dividual by virtue of this part in him, when, namely, 
his high spirit preserves in the midst of pains and 
pleasures? the rule handed down by the reason as to 
what is or is not to be feared.”’ “ Right,” he said. 
“ But wise by that small part that” ruled in him and 
handed down these commands, by its possession‘ in 
turn within it of the knowledge of what is beneficial 
for each and for the whole, the community composed 
of the three.” “Byall means.” “And again, was he 
not sober by reason of the friendship and concord of 
these same parts, when, namely, the ruling principle 
and its two subjects are at one in the belief that the 
reason ought to rule, and do not raise faction against 
it?’’ “ The virtue of soberness certainly,” said he, 
‘is nothing else than this, whether in a city or an 
@ Cf. supra 389 pv. 
¢ Cf. supra 415 FE. 
1 Cf. Isoc. xii. 138 atrn ydp éorw 4 Bovdevonern sept 
axrdvTwr. 9 Cf. 429 cp. 
7 pai gyi s e Grammar, § ease Rx 
ov: anacolu epex is, co n TOP see 
dcacwfy. ab probably acids Sinriakthe chataandhdence. 


tobro, modes te Kal iduitov. "AAA pev 87 
dixaids ye, @ modAdKis A€yomev, TOUTW Kal OUTWS 
»” I AAT > / Ti in t . > 4 4 
€oTat. oAAn) avayKn. Ti odv; elrov éyd pH 
e ~ > 4 »” 4 ~ 
7 piv arapBAdverar aAXo Te SuKavoovvyn Soxetv 
a nn > 7 sX > / J Od mM” wv 
elvat 7 Omep ev TH TOAEL Epavn; OdK Eporye, Edy, 
“~ e / -_ > > 
Edoxet. “Ode yap, qv 8 eyd, mavtdmacw av 
, ” ¢ ~ ” > ~ ~ > 
BeBawoaipeba, ct Te Hudv ete ev TH px apde- 
oBnret, Ta hoptiKa adT@ mpoagépovtes. Iota 57; 
> ~ “~ 
Ofov «i d€0u tuds avopodroyeicbar mepi Te exeivns 
Ths moAews Kal TOD Exelvn Opolws TepuKdTOS TE 
Kal TeOpappevov avdpds, et Soke? Gv mapakxara- 
na ~ 
Onknv xpvoiov 7 apyupiov de€dpevos 6 ToLodTos 
> ~ ~ ~ 
amootephoa, tiv’ av ole oinOHvat totro avrov 
443 Spdcar pwadAov 7 daou pr Towdro; Oddev’ av, 
é¢n. Odxodv kai fepoovdkidv Kat KAordv Kal 
~ nn 27 ¢ , n~ , , 
mpodoai@yv, 7 dia €Taipwv 4 Sypocia modewr, 
> ‘ n ” > 3 A ‘A 2993 
€xTos av ovtos «in; “Exrds. Kai pv ovd 
OmwoTiobv admioTos 7) KaTa OpKous 7 KaTa Tas 
mM e / ~ A mv ~ A 
dAAas opodoyias. [lds yap av; Moryetar pv 
Kal yovéwy dpéAcvar Kal Pedy abeparrevaias mavti 
GAAw padrov 7 TH ToLwovtTw mpoajKovow. Ilavzi 
B pevtot, bn. Odxoby todtwy mdvtwv airiov, dott 

@@ modd\dkis: that is, by the principle of 7d éavrov 

> drauBdwverar: is the edge or outline of the definition 
blunted or dimmed when we transfer it to the individual ? 

¢ The transcendental or philosophical definition is con- 
firmed by vulgar tests. The man who is just in Plato’s 
sense will not steal or betray or fail in ordinary duties. 
Cf. Aristot. Eth. Nic. 1178 b 16 4 goprixds 6 Erawos.. . 
to say that the gods are cwé¢poves. Similarly Plato feels 
that there is a certain vulgarity in applying the cheap 
tests of prudential morality (ef. Phaedo 68 c-p) to intrinsic 
virtue. ‘* Be this,” is the highest expression of the moral 



individual.” “‘ But surely, now, a man is just by that 
which and in the way we have so often* described.” 
“ That is altogether necessary.” “* Well then,” said 
I, “ has our idea of justice in any way lost the edge ® 
of its contour so as to look like anything else than 
precisely what it showed itself to be in the state?” 
“I think not,” he said. “‘ We might,” I said, “ com- 
pletely confirm your reply and our own conviction 
thus, if anything in our minds still disputes our defini- 
tion—by applying commonplace and vulgar ¢ tests to 
it.” “What are these?” “For example, if an 
answer were demanded to the question concerning 
that city and the man whose birth and breeding was 
in harmony with it, whether we believe that such a 
man, entrusted with a deposit ¢ of gold or silver, would 
withhold it and embezzle it, who do you suppose 
would think that he would be more likely so to act 
than men of a different kind?” ‘ No one would,” 
he said. “ And would not he be far removed from 
sacrilege and theft and betrayal of comrades in 
private life or of the state in public?” “ He would.” 
“ And, moreover, he would not be in any way faithless 
either in the keeping of his oaths or in other agree- 
ments.” “Howcouldhe?” “ Adultery, surely, and 
neglect of parents and of the due service of the gods 
would pertain to anyone rather than to such a man.” 
“To anyone indeed,” he said. “ And is not the cause 

law. “Do this,” inevitably follows. Cf. Leslie Stephen, 
Science of Ethics, pp. 376 and 385, and Emerson, Sel/- 
Reliance: “* But I may also neglect the reflex standard, 
and absolve me to myself . . . If anyone imagines that this 
law is lax, let him keep its commandment one day.” The 
Xenophontie Socrates (Xen. Mem. iv. 4. 10-11 and iv. 4. 17) 
relies on these vulgar tests. 
* Cf. supra on 332 a and Aristot. Rhet. 1383 b 21. 




>. ~ ~ > > ~ td A ¢ ~ 
adtod T&v é€v atT@ Exactov ta abtod mparre 
apxfs Te mépt Kal Tod apxeofar; Todro pev obdv, 

\ +) A EA ” - ¢ ~ 
Kal oddev dAdo. “Ete tu obv Erepov Cyrets dSixato- 
avvnv elvac } TavTnv Thy Sdvapyw, 7 Tods ToLod- 
Tous avopas Te trapéxetat Kal modes; Ma Aia, 

& ds, odK eywye. 


XVII. TéAcov dpa ypiv ro évdaviov amoreré- 
Acorar, 6 ebapev tromrebaa, Ws edOds dpydjevor 
Ths moAews oikilew Kata Yedv twa eis apyny Te 
Kal TUTov Twa THS Sixaoodvyns Kwduvevopev 
7 / / A s A a 
euBeByxevar. Ilavtdmace pev odv. To 8€ ye jv 
” io /, a \ > a ” / ~ 
apa, ® VAavKwr, de’ 6 Kat wdedre?, eidwAdv tT THs 

A ~ 
duxatoovvns, TO TOV ev GKUTOTOMLKOV dice OpIAs 
éxew oxvtotopeiv Kai aGAXo pndev mpdrrewv, tov S€ 

\ / ‘ > \ 4 
TexTovikov Textatvecbar, Kat tTaAAa 8) ovbtws. 
Daiverar. To dé ye adnbes tovodro pév te Hv, ds 
” ¢ 4 > > > ‘ \ ” ~ 
couxev, 7) SuKacoovvn, GAA’ od rept THy ew mpaéw 
~ 7 ‘A A > \ € > ~ 
t&v avtod, adda Tepi THY EevTos Ws aAnfas Tepi 
€avTov Kal Ta €avTov, py edcavra taAAdTpia 

2 6. cf. supra on 434 pd, 

> The contemplation of the eféwov, image or symbol, 
leads us to the reality. The reality is always the Platonic 
Idea. The etdwdor, in the case of ordinary “things,” is the 
material copy which men mistake for the reality (516 a). 
In the case of spiritual things and moral ideas, there is 
no visible image or symbol (Polit. 286 a), but imperfect 
analogies, aabaier definitions, suggestive phrases, as ra éavrod 
mparrew, well-meant laws and institutions serve as the eléwa 
in which the philosophic dialectician may find a reflection 
of the true idea. Cf. on 520 c, Sophist 234 c, Theaetet. 
150 B. 

¢ Of. Tim. 86 v, Laws 731 ©, Apol. 23.4. The reality of 
justice as distinguished from the elé6wdov, which in this case 
is merely the economic division of labour. Adam errs in 



of this to be found in the fact that each of the 
principles within him does its own work in the 
matter of ruling and being ruled?” “ Yes, that and 
nothing else.” “‘ Do you still, then, look for justice 
to be anything else than this potency which provides 
men and cities of this sort?’’ “‘ No, by heaven,” 
he said, “I do not.” 

XVII. “ Finished, then, is our dream and perfected 
—the surmise we spoke of,’ that, by some Providence, 
at the very beginning of our foundation of the state, 
wechanced to hit upon the original principle and a sort 
of type of justice.” “‘ Most assuredly.” “It really 
was, it seems, Glaucon, which is why it helps,? a sort 
of adumbration of justice, this principle that it is right 
for the cobbler by nature to cobble and occupy him- 
self with nothing else, and the carpenter to practise 
carpentry, and similarly all others. But the truth of 
the matter ° was, as it seems, that justice is indeed 
something of this kind, yet not in regard to the doing 
of one’s own business externally, but with regard to 
that which is within and in the true sense concerns 
one’s self, and the things of one’s self—it means that ¢ 

thinking that the real justice is justice in the soul, and the 
el6wov is justice in the state. In the state too the division 
of labour may be taken in the lower or in the higher sense. 
Cf. supra on 370 a, Introd. p. xv. 

@ un édcavta ... Sdtay 444: cf. Gorgias 459 c, 462 c. 
A series of participles in implied indirect discourse expand 
the meaning of ri évrés (rpaiw), and enumerate the con- 
ditions precedent (resumed in oftw 54 443 E; cf. Protag. 
325 a) of all action which is to be called just if it tends to 
preserve this inner harmony of soul, and the reverse if it 
tends to dissolve it. The subject of rpdrrew is anybody or 
Everyman. For the general type of sentence and the Stoic 
principle that nothing imports but virtue ef. 591 © and 
618 c 



mpdttew ExaoTov év att@ pundé modumpaypoveir 
mpos ddAnda 7a ev tH pox yen, adda TO 
évTt Ta olketa ed Oéuevov Kat apfavra adrov 
atdtob Kal Kooujnoavta Kal didov yevouevov EavT@ 
kat vvappdcavta tpia dvtTa womep Spous Tpeis 
appovias datexyv@s vedtns Te Kal badrns Kal 
E péons, kal ef dda arta petagd tuyydver dvra, 
mavTa tadta f~vvdjcavta Kal mavTadmacw eva 
yevopevov €k TroAA@v, awdpova Kal 7ppoopevor, 
ovTw 61) mpatTew on, eav Te mpaTTH 7 TeEpt 
Xpnwatwv Krhow 7} wept cwpyatos Yepameiav 7 Kat 
moAtiKev Te 7) mept ta tdia EvpBddAna, ev maar 
TovTois iyovpevov Kat dvoudlovta SiKatav pev 
kai Kady pag, ) av tadrnv Thy E€w adly TE 
kat Evvarepyalnrar, codiav dé thy éemuoTatovaav 
444 Tavry Th mpage. emiaTHnv, adukov de mpatw, 
av det tadryv Avy, apabliay Sé tiv radrn ad 

* Cf. supra on 433 E. 

’ Cf. Gorg. 491 p where Callicles does not understand. 

¢ Cf. Gorg. 504. 

@ Cf. infra 621 c and supra on 352 a. : 

¢ The harmony of the three parts of the soul is compared 
to that of the three fundamental notes or strings in the 
octave, including any intervening tones, and so by implica- 
tion any faculties of the soul overlooked in the preceding 
classification. Cf. Plutarch, Plat. Quest. 9, Proclus, p. 230 
Kroll. déorep introduces the images, the exact application 
of which is pointed by arexva@s. Cf.on343c. The scholiast 
tries to make two octaves (dis 5:4 racGv) of it. The technical 
musical details have at the most an antiquarian interest, and 
in no way affect the thought, which is that of Shakespeare’s 

For government, though high and low and lower, 
Put into parts, doth keep in one concent, 



a man must not suffer the principles in his soul to do 
each the work of some other and interfere and meddle 
with one another, but that he should dispose well of 
what in the true sense of the word is properly his own,” 
and having first attained to self-mastery ° and beauti- 
ful order © within himself,? and having harmonized ¢ 
these three principles, the notes or intervals of three 
terms quite literally the lowest, the highest, and the 
mean, and all others there may be between them, 
and having linked and bound all three together and 
made of himself a unit,’ one man instead of many, 
self-controlled and in unison, he should then and then 
only turn to practice if he find aught to do either in the 
getting of wealth or the tendance of the body orit may 
be in political action or private business, in all such 
doings believing and naming’ the just and honour- 
able action to be that which preserves and helps to 
produce this condition of soul, and wisdom the science 
that presides over such conduct; and believing and 
naming the unjust action to be that which ever tends 
to overthrow this spiritual constitution, and brutish 

Congreeing in a full and natural close 

Like music. (Henry V. 1. ii. 179.) 
Cf. Cicero, De Rep. ii. 42, and Milton (Reason of Church 
Government), “Discipline . . . which with her musical 

chords preserves and holds all the parts thereof together.” 

’ Cf. Epin. 992 s. The idea was claimed for the Pyth- 
agoreans; cf. Zeller 1. i. p. 463, Guyau, Esquisse d’una 
Morale, p- 109 “La moralité n’est autre chose que l’unité 
de l’étre.” “The key to effective life is unity of life,” says 
another modern rationalist. 

* évoudfovra betrays a consciousness that the ordinary 
meaning of words is somewhat forced for edification. Cf. 
Laws 864 a-s and Unity of Plato’s Thought, p. 9, n. 21. 
Aristotle (Eth. Nic. 1138 b 6) would Pacer: gr this as mere 



emortatotoay Sdéfav. Iavrdracw, F 5 és, & 
UaKpares, adn OF) Aéyets. Kiev, yy, & éyw: Tov 
pev dicatov eat Gvbpa. Kat moAw Kal _Succvoodyny, 
é Tvyxdver ev adrois ov, ef daipev edpnKevat, ovK 
dy mave Tt, oluar, ddFauev pevdecbar. Ma Aia 
ov pevtot, pn. Ddpev apa; Ddpev. 

XVIII. "Eorw 84, jv 8 eyed: pera yap TodTo 
oKemTéov, ola, dduxiav. Ajjdov OTL. Odxobv 
oTdow Twa ad Tpi@v ovTwv ToUTw@ Set adriv 
elvat Kal moAvmpaypootvny Kat dAdoTpiompaypo- 
ovvnv kab evavdoraow Hépous Twos TO OAw Tis 
poxiis, o wv apxn ev avrh ov TpoonKov, GANd ToL- 
ovTov ovTos puoet, olov mperrew abr@ dovAeveuv 
T® Tod dpxuKob yevous ovtu'; Touabr” drra., oluat, 
drjooper Kal 77 ToUTey Tapaxny Kat mdvqv 
elvau 7HV Te ddikiav Kal dcodactay Kal devdAtav Kat 
dpabiay Kal EvdAnBdnv macav Karciay. Tada pev 
obv tabra, edn. Odxodv, tv 8 ey, Kal Td dduKa 
mpatrew Kal TO ddiKely Kal ad TO Sixata Trovetv, 
Tatra mavTa Tuyydaver dvtTa KaTddnra dn adds, 
eimep Kal 7) Gdukia Te Kal Suxatoovvn; lds 84; 
"Ori, Hv 8 eywd, Tuyydver oddev Siadepovta Td 
dyvewOv te Kal voowd@v, ws exelva ev oopare, 

1 rpérew . . . dvre is Plainly the better reading. Burnet 

ageitids the additional rod 8’ af doudevew of several mss. to Te 
ov dovevery, Which might be justified by 358 a. 

@ ériorhunv ... ddtav: a hint of a fundamental distinc- 
tion, not explicitly mentioned before in the Republic. Cf. 
Meno 97 8 ff. and Unity of Plato’s Thought, PP. 47-49, 
It is used here rhetorically to exalt justice and disparage 
injustice. duadia is a very strong word, possibly used here 
already in the special Platonic sense: ‘the ignorance that 
mistakes itself for knowledge. Cf. Sophist 229 c. 



, to be the opinion? that in turn presides ® 
over this.” “What you say is entirely true, Socrates.” 
“Well,” said I, “if we should affirm that we had 
found the just man and state and what justice really 
is® in them, I think we should not be much mis- 
taken”’ “No indeed, we should not,” he said. 
“ Shall we affirm it, then?” “ Let us so affirm.” 

XVIII. “ So be it, then,” said I ; “ next after this, I 
take it, we must consider injustice.” “* Obviously.” 
* Must not this be a kind of civil war 4 of these three 
principles, their meddlesomeness* and interference 
with one another’s functions, and the revolt of one 
part against the whole of the soul that it may hold 
therein a rule which does not belong to it, since its 
nature is such that it befits it to serve as a slave to 
the ruling principle? Something of this sort, I fancy, 
is what we shall say, and that the confusion of these 
principles and their straying from their proper course 
is injustice and licentiousness and cowardice and 
brutish ignorance and, in general, all turpitude.” 
“ Precisely this,” he replied. “‘ Then,” said I, “ to 
act unjustly and be unjust and in turn to act justly— 
the meaning of all these terms becomes at once plain 
and clear, since injustice and justice are so.” ‘“ How 
so?” ‘ Because,” said I, “these are in the soul 
what? the healthful and thediseaseful are in the body; 

> émisrarovcay: Isocrates would have used a synonym 
instead of repeating the word. 

¢ Cf. 337 B. 

4 oréow: cf. 440 ©. It is defined in Sophist 228 zB, 
Aristotle would again regard this as mere metaphor. 

* xokurpaypocivyy: supra 434 B and Isoc. viii. 59. 

4 EvAAHBSyny: Summing up, as in Phaedo 69 B. 

* os éxewa: a proportion is thus usually stated in an- 
acoluthic apposition. 

VOL. I 2E 417 



Tabra ev poxh. 11h; édy. Ta pév Tov dyvewva 
bylevav €pimrovel, Ta de vooddn vocov. Nat. 
Odxody kal TO pev Sikava mparrew Sucaroodyny 

€pmrovel, TO e aduka dSuictay 5 “Avdynn. "Eort dé 

TO pev byleay Tovey Ta eV TH owpaT. KaTa 
vow Kabvordva Kparety Te Kat KparetoBac on 
aAAnAwy, TO Se vogov Tapa. piow dpyew TE Kal 
dpxeabau dAAo oa dMov. "Eort yap. Odxoiv 
av, edny, TO duKavoovvnv €pmrovety Ta ev TH puyH 
Kata pvow caiordvat Kpateiv TE kal mparetobat 
ba’ dAAjAwr, To Oe dductay Tapa pvow apyew 
Te Kal dpxeobau do oa’ Mov; Kopud7, ey. 
"Apery) pev dpa, Ws EouKev, byte Té Tis ay ely 
Kat KaAXos Kat evetia poxis, Karta. d€ vdaos Te 
Kal aloxos Kal dobévera. “Kotwv ovrw. *Ap’ oov 
ov Kal Ta pev Kara emiTndedpara els apeTis KTH- 
ow déper, TA 8’ aicypa eis Kalas ; ‘Avdy 

XIX. To 81) Aourov 75n, ws Corker, Hiv ton 
oxepacbar, moTepov ad AvowreAct Sixaua TE mpar- 
Tew Kal KaAd émuTndevew Kat elvar dixatov, eav TE 
AavOavn éav Te By Touobros wv, } aduKety Te Kal 
ddixov elvar, edvrrep pr) 51d Sikyv pnde BeAriov 
ylyyntar Kodaldpevos. ’AAN’, ébn, & LVedxpares, 

* The common-sense point of view, ‘* fit fabricando faber.” 
Cf. Aristot. Eth. Nic. 1103 a 32. 

In Gorg. 460 B, Socrates argues the paradox that he who 
knows justice does it. Cf. Unity of Plato’s Thought, p. 11, 
n. 42. 

» Cf. the generalization of épws to include medicine and 
music in Symp. 186-187, and Tim. 82 a, Laws 906 c, Unity of 
Plato’s Thought, n. 500. 

¢ The identification of virtue with spiritual health really, 
as Plato says (445 a), answers the main question of the 



there is no difference.”’ “In what respect?” he 
said. “ Healthful things surely engender health? and 
diseaseful disease.” “ Yes.’’ “ Then does not doing 
just acts engender justice and unjust injustice?” 
“ Of necessity.” “But to produce health is to 
establish the elements in a body in the natural 
relation of dominating and being dominated? by one 
another, while to cause disease is to bring it about 
_that one rules or is ruled by the other contrary to 
nature.” “ Yes, that is so.” ‘“* And is it not like- 
wise the production of justice in the soul to establish 
‘its principles in the natural relation of controlling 
and being controlled by one another, while injustice 
is to cause the one to rule or be ruled by the other 
.contrary to nature?” “Exactly so,” he said. 
_“Virtue, then, as it seems, would be a kind of health 
and beauty and good condition of the soul, and vice 
would be disease,’ ugliness, and weakness.” “It is 
so.” “Then is it not also true that beautiful and 
honourable pursuits tend to the winning of virtue 
‘and the ugly to vice?” “Of necessity.’ 

XIX. “ And now at last. it seems, it remains for us 
to consider whether it is profitable to do justice and 
practise honourable pursuits and be just, whether one 
ais known to be such or not, or whether injustice 
profits, and to be unjust, if only a man escape punish- 
ment and is not bettered by chastisement’” “‘ Nay, 

Republic. It is not explicitly used as one of ‘the three final 
arguments in the ninth book, but is implied in 591 8. It is 
found “‘already *’ in Crito 47 p-z. Cf. Gorg. 479 B. 

# xaxia . : . alcxos: Sophist 228 & distinguishes two forms 
of xaxia: vécos or moral evil, and ignorance or alcxos. Cf. 
Gorg. 477 B. 

* édy te . . . dv Te: ef. supra 337 c, 367 E, 427 D, 429 £. 

4 Cf. Gorg. 512 a-s, and supra on 380 Bs. 



yeNotov euovye daiverar 7d oxéupa ylyvecba Hd, 
> ~ ~ 

€l ToD prev awpatos tis dicews Siadhberpoperys 

Soxe? od Buwrov elvar od8é peta mdvTwv ovriwy TE 

\ ~ a 
Kal 7oT@v Kal tavTos mAOvTOV Kal maons apxAs, 
Ths S€ avrod tovrouv & liye dvcews tapat- 

Bropevns Kat diadberpouevns Buwrov dpa €orat, 
> a“ ~ ~ 
edvrep tis mou 6 av BovdnOA ado mM TobTO, 
i 50 / f. A > / > 7 
o7oVev Kakias pev Kal adikias amaddayjoerat, 
Sixaoovyvny S€ Kal dperivy Kricerar, emevdymep 
> / + e / e A 4 
epdvn ye ovta éxatepa ola tpets SveAnAvOapev. 
Tedotov yap, tv 8 eyd: GA dpws emeimep 
evrat0a eAndvOapev, Goov ofdv te oadéorara 
katietv bt Tadta ottTws exer, o} Xp7) G7oKdpveL. 
“Hrwora vi) tov Ala, édn, mavrwy dmoKpnréov. 

C Acipo viv, qv 8 yd, va Kat iSys, doa Kal dy 
” ¢€ / e > ‘ tal A A \ »” , a 
exer 7) Kakia, Ws euol SoKel, a ye 7 Kal akva Deas. 
¢ ” , /, \ 2 Ss > > 7 
Ezopar, edn: povov Aéye. Kal pv, qv 8 eyo, 
Ad > \ = / > A > ~ 
@omep amo oKxomds por daiverar, éemevd)) evTadla 
> / ~ / a“ \ ~ 
avapeBykapev Tod Adyou, ev pev elvas eldos Tis 

* Cf.456 p. On the following argumentum ex contrario 
cf. supra on 336 £. 

®’ Cf. on 353 pv and Aristot. De an. 414 a 12 ff. Cf. 
Unity of Plato’s Thought, p. 41. f 

¢ Of. 577 pv, Gorg. 466 ©. If all men desire the good, he 
who does evil does not do what he really wishes. 

4 gcov . . . kavtdeiv is generally taken as epexegetic of 
évraiéa. It is rather felt with od xpy droxduvew, 

¢ Cf. Apol. 25 c. 

f & ye dh kal déia Oéas: for xal cf. Soph. 223 a, 229 p, Tim. 
83 c, Polit. 285 3, and infra 544 a, c-p. By the strict 
theory of ideas any distinction may mark a class, and so 
constitute an idea. (Cf. De Platonis Idearum Doctrina, 
pp. 22-25.) But Plato’s logical practice recognizes that 



Socrates,” he said, “ I think that from this point on 
our inquiry becomes an absurdity *—if, while life is 
admittedly intolerable with a ruined constitution of 
body even though accompanied by all the food and 
drink and wealth and power in the world, we are 
yet to be asked to suppose that, when the very nature 
and constitution of that whereby we live? is disordered 
and corrupted, life is going to be worth living, if a 
man can only do as he pleases, and pleases to do any- 
thing save that which will rid him of evil and injustice 
and make him possessed of justice and virtue—now 
that the two have been shown to be as we have 
described them.” ‘“‘ Yes, it is absurd,” said I; “‘ but 
nevertheless, now that we have won to this height, 
we must not grow weary in endeavouring to discover # 
with the utmost possible clearness that these things 
are so.’ “‘ That is the last thing in the world we 
must do,” he said. “Come up here ¢ then,” said I, 
“that you may see how many are the kinds of evil, 
I mean those that it is worth while to observe and 
distinguish’’’ “I am with you,” he said; “ only do 
you say on.’”’ “ And truly,” said I, “ now that we 
have come to this height? of argument I seem to see 

only typical or relevant “Ideas” are worth naming or 
considering. The ublic does not raise the metaphysical 
question how a true idea is to be distinguished from a part 
or from a partial or casual concept. Cf. Unity of Plato’s 
Thought, pp. 52-53, n. 381, Polit. 263 a-s. 

¢ Cf. 588 8, Emerson, Nominalist and Realist, ii. p. 256: 
“* We like to come to a height of land and see the landscape, 
just as we value a general remark in conversation.” Cf. 
Lowell, Democracy, Prose Works, vi. 8: ‘He who has 
mounted the tower of Plato to look abroad from it will 
never hope to climb another with so lofty a vantage of 
speculation.” From this and 517 a-s, the dvdSacis became 
a technical or cant term in Neoplatonism. 



dperijs, airetpa. de Tijs Kakias, Tértapa 8 ev 
avrots arta dv Kat dfvov emysvnoOhvar. Ids 
Aéyets ; edn. “Ooor, fv & eye, moAurev@v Tpdrrot 
elow <td) EXOVTES, TooovTOL xudvvevovor kal 
D guys tpomo elvar. Idoou 57; Llévre prev, Hv 
5° eyo, ToArev@v, mere dé ipoxijs. Aéye, eon, 
tives. Aéyw, elov, ott cis pev obros ov mets 
Bred AvOaper Todrelas ety a TpoTros, em70v0- 
pacbetin oe dy Kal Ox eyyevomevov pev yap 
dvBpos € Evos €v Tots dpxovar Suadépovros Bacwdeta 
dv KAnbetn, mAevoveny be dpuoroKxparia. AA OA, 
édy. Tobro pev Tolvur, my 3 eye, ev eldos Aeyen 
ouUTE yap av mAciovs ovre eis ey VevOpevos KwW1}- 
Gevev av TOV a€iwv Adyou voy Ths moAews, 
Tpophh TE Kat mraideia xpynodpuevos, 4 SdinAPopev. 
Od yap «ikos, én). 

* & uér, ete.: perhaps a faint reminiscence of the line 
éoOXol péev yap amdQGs, ravrodaras dé Kaxol, 

quoted by Aristot. Hth. Nic. 1106 b 35. . It suggests Plato’s 
principle of the unity of virtue, as dzeipa below suggests 
the logical doctrine of the Phileb. 16 and Parmen. 145 a, 
ar B-c that the other of the definite idea is the indefinite and 

> The true state is that in which knowledge governs. It 
may be named indifferently monarchy, or aristocracy, acco accord- 
ing as such knowledge happens to be found in one or more 
than one. It can never be the possession of many. Cf. 
infra 494 a. The inconsistencies which some critics have 



as from a point of outlook that there is one form ¢ of 
excellence, and that the forms of evil are infinite, 
yet that there are some four among them that it is 
worth while to take note of.” ‘‘ What do you mean?” 
he said. ‘‘ As many as are the varieties of political 
constitutions that constitute specific types, so many, 
it seems likely, are the characters of soul.” “ How 
many, pray?” “There are five kinds of constitu- 
tions,” said I, “‘ and five kinds of soul.” ‘“‘ Tell me 
what they are,” he said. “I tell you,” said I, “ that 
one way of government would be the constitution 
that we have just expounded, but the names that 
might be applied to it are two.? If one man of sur- 
passing merit rose among the rulers, it would be 
denominated royalty ; if more than oné, aristocracy.” 
“True,” he said. ‘“* Well, then,” I said, “‘ this is one 
of the forms I have in mind. For neither would a 
number of such men, nor one if he arose among them, 
alter to any extent worth mentioning the laws of 
our city—if he preserved the breeding and the educa- 
tion that we have described.” ‘‘ It is not likely,” 
he said. 

found between this statement and other parts of the Republic, 
are imaginary. Hitherto the Republic has contemplated a 
plurality of rulers, and such is its scheme to the end. But 
we are explicitly warned in 540 p and 587 p that this is 
a matter of indifference. It is idle then to argue with 

Immisch, Krohn, and others that the passage marks a 
sudden, violent alteration of the original design. 



I. ’Ayabiy pév toivuv thy Tovadryny odw Te Kal 
mrouretav Kal opOnv Kare, Kal dvdpa TOV Touodrov" 
kakas dé Tas dAdas Kal HuapTnpevas, eimep avTn 
6pO7, mept Te TOAewv Suoucnoers Kat Tept iuarav 
puxijs TpoTov KaTACKEUHD, év TETTAPOL movnpias 
<iSeow ovoas. Iloias 57) tavras; edn. Kal ey 
bev Ha tas edetts epdv, ws peo epaivovTo ekaoTat 

Beéé aAAr Aw _beraBaivew: 6 de IToAeuapyos— 
OpuKpov yap dmeté pe Too “Aderpdvrou kaljoTo— 
exreivas Thy xeipa Kal AaBopevos Tob twatiov dve- 
Dev avTob Tapa. TOV Gpov € €xeivov TE mpoonydyeTo 
Kal mporeivas €avTov eAeyev drra TpooKEKUPas, 
dv dddo pev ovdev Karnkovoaper, Tobe 8€" 
“Agijgoper obv, edn, 7% Tt Spdooper; “Hevora 

Yes efn 6 *Adeiuavros peya 707 déywv. Kat 
eyo, Tt pdduora, eon, vpeis odK adiere; Le, 

* Cf. on 427 £, and Newman, Introd. to Aristot. Pol. p. 14; 
for 66%, *‘normal,”’ see p. 423. 

° Karaoxevifv : a highly general word not to be pressed in 
this periphrasis. Cf. Gorg. 455 ©, 477 B. 

© Cf. 562 c, Theaetet. 180 c, Stein on Herod. i. 5. For the 
transition here to the digression of books V., VI., and VII. 
cf. Introd. p. xvii, Phaedo 84c. ‘‘ Digression’’ need not 
imply that these books were not a part of the original 



I. “ To such a city, then, or constitution I apply the 
terms good¢ and right—and to thecorresponding kind 
of man; but the others I describe as bad and mis- 
taken, if this one is right, in respect both to the 
administration of states and to the formation? of 
the character of the individual soul, they falling under 
four forms of badness.’’ ‘“‘ What are these,” he said. 
And I was going on* to enumerate them in what 
seemed to me the order of their evolution ¢ from one 
another, when Polemarchus—he sat at some little 
distance ¢ from Adeimantus—stretched forth his hand, 
and, taking hold of his garment‘ from above by the 
shoulder, drew the other toward him and, leaning 
forward himself, spoke a few words in his ear, of 
which we overheard nothing? else save only this, 
“ Shall we let him off,* then,” he said, “ or what shall 
we do?” “By no means,” said Adeimantus, now 
raising his voice. ‘‘ What, pray,’’é said I, “is it that 
you are not letting off?” ‘“‘ You,” said he. “ And 

4 peraSaivew: the word is half technical. Cf. 547 c, 
550 p, Laws 676 a, 736 p-F, 894 4. — 

* amwrépw absolutely. C/. Cratinus 229 Kock &voi cé@nvrac 
THS AUpas arwrépw. 

t Cf. 327 8. 9 Cf. 359 rE. * Cf. on 327 c. 

* Cf. 337 pv, 343 B, 421 c, 612 c, Laches 188 ©, Meno 80 z. 
There is a play on the double meaning, ‘* What, pray?” and 
“Why, pray?” 



CH 8 bs. “Or, eyds etrov, ti wddvora; *Amop- 
paucity jpiv Soxeis, edn, Kat efdos GAov od TO 
>). 4 2 ve a“ bs @ \ 8 /r 
eAaxiotov exkrértew Tod Adyov, iva pr deAPys, 

\ ~ 
kat Ajcew oinfjva cindy adro davAws, Ws apa 
\ ~ ~ 
TEpt yuvakav te Kal traidwv mavti SHAov, ott 
kowa Ta didwy gota. Odxodv dpbds, édnv, & 
> / ~ ~ 
Adciuavte; Nai, 4 8 ds: adda 70 dpb@s TodTO, 
eo &. ae 
womep TadAAa, Adyou Seitar, Tis 6 Tpomos THs 
kowwvias: tool yap av yévowTo. pa) obv Tapiis 
Ld a 
D dvtwa ad déyers. chs Tets mdédar mrepysevomev 
olopevol o€ tov prvnobjcecbar madomotlas TE TEpt, 
TOs madoroujoovrat, Kal yevopevovs 7@s Opé- 
yoovar, Kat ddnv tadrny jv dA€yets Kowwviay 
yuvaik@v te Kal mraidwy: péya yap Te oldpucla 
dépew Kat dAov els trodutelav opbds 7H pH dpbds 
yeyvopmevov. viv ovv eézrevdi) aAAns emtAapPaver 
Todireias mplv Tabra txavds dieAcobar, SédoKrae 
450 jutv toito, 6 od jKovoas, TO oe pr) peOrevat, 
‘ BD) ~ / a s / ‘\ 
mplv av tadta mavra womep TaAAa dieAByns. Kai 
> A ‘4 c / ” ‘ ~ /, 
ewe Tolvuv, 6 TAavkwv edn, Kowwvov tis Pydov 
tavtTns TiBere. “Apéder, bn 6 Opacdpuaxos, maar 
tadra Sedoypeva nuiv vopile, @ LedKpares. 
II. Ofov, Fv 8 ey, eipydoacbe émAaBopevol 
@ Cf. Soph. Trach. 437. » So Isoc. xv. 74 ddous eldeot. 
° Cf. 424 a, Laws 739 c. Aristotle says that the posses- 
sions of friends should be separate in ownership but common 
in use, as at Sparta. Cf. Newman, Introd. to Aristot. Pol. 
p. 201, Epicurus in Diog. Laert. x. 11, Aristot. Pol. 1263 a 
30 ff., Eurip. Androm. 270. 
4 Of. 459 pv, Laws 668 pv, Aristot. Pol. 1269 b 13, Shakes. 
Tro. and Ores. t. i. 23 “ But here’s yet in the word hereafter 
the kneading, the making of the cake,” etc. 

® Of. Laws 665 B 7. 
* Gf. Aristot. Pol. 1264 a 12. 



for what special reason, pray?” said I. “ We think 
you are a slacker,” he said, “and are trying to cheat* 
us out of a whole division,® and that not the least, of 
the argument to avoid the trouble of expounding it, 
and expect to “get away with it’ by observing thus 
lightly that, of course, in respect to women and 
_ children it is obvious to everybody that the posses- 
sions of friends will be in common.’”” “ Well, isn’t 
that right, Adeimantus?”’ I said. “ Yes,” said he, 
“but this word ‘ right,’? like other things, requires 
defining * as to the way‘ and manner of such a com- 
munity. There might be many ways. Don’t, then, 
pass over the one that you’ have in mind. For we 
have long been lying in wait for you, expecting that 
you would say something both of the procreation of 
children and their bringing up,” and would explain 
the whole matter of the community of women and 
children of which you speak. We think that the 
right or wrong management of this makes a great 
difference, all the difference in the world,‘ in the 
constitution of a state ; so now, since you are begin- 
ning on another constitution before sufficiently defin- 
ing this, we are firmly resolved, as you overheard, not 
to let you go till you have expounded all this as fully 
as you did the rest.” ““Set me down, too,” said 
Glaucon, “ as voting this ticket’’’ ‘‘ Surely,” said 
Thrasymachus, “ you may consider it a joint resolu- 
tion of us all, Socrates.” 

II. “ What a thing you have done,” said I, “in thus 

¢ Emphatic. Cf. 427 £. 

* yevouévous: a noun is supplied from the preceding verb. 
Cf. on 598 c, and supra on 341 pv. 

t uéya ... cal Srov: cf. 469 c, 527 c, Phaedo 79 £, Laws 
779 B, 944 c, Symp. 188 p, Demosth. ii. 22, Aeschyl. Prom. 
961, i Cf. Protag. 330 c. 



pov. daov Adyov mdAw domep e& apyis Kwetre 
TEpt THs woAtTElas! jv ws 7dn SvedynAvdads Eywye 
” ~ ~ 
éxarpov dyaraév, el tis edoor Taira drrodeEdpevos 
Bais rére eppijOn: & viv bycis mapaxadobvtes ovdK 
lore Soov éopov Adywv emeyelpete’ dv dpdv eyw 
nmaphKa TOTE, p21) Tapdoxou moAvy dxAov. Ti dé; 
i 8 &s 6 Q@pacdpaxos: xpucoxoncovras otet 
Tovade vov evbdde adiyar, ard’ od Adywv aKovao- 
pévous; Nai, efzov, petpiwy ye. Meézpov dé y’, 
édn, ® Ld«pares, 6 TAadawv, towodtwv Adywv 
> , oe c , pe chee > \ \ \ 
akovew ‘dAos 6 Blos vodv éxovow. adAa TO pev 
Huerepov €a* av dé wept dv epwrdpev pndau@s 
1 a a 
C dmoxapns 7 cou doxet SieEvciv, Tis 4) Kowwvia Tots 
dvrakw piv maidiwy te wépt Kal yuvarkdv €orae 
Kal tpodis véwv ert dvrwv, THs ev TO petakd 
Xpovw yyvouevns yevécews Te Kai madelas, 7 87 
emimovwrdarn SoKet elvar. meup@ odv eimeiv tiva 
/ lal , > / > csv > 
tpomov Set ylyvecbar adryv. Od pddwv, @ 
” > *~ > + > \ \ > , 
evdatpov, Hv 8° eyed, dueADetv- moAAas yap antoTias 
” ” ~ ~ ” e / ‘ 
éyer €7t waAdrov Trav Eutrpoober dv SujAPomev. Kat 
yap os duvara Aێyerar, amuototr dv, Kai ef O TE 
pddora yévouto, ws dpior av ein tadra, Kat 
D radrn dmoricera. 816 81) Kal Oxvos Tis adTav 
@ Cf. Theaetet. 184 c, Gorg. 469 c. 
» For the metaphor ¢f. Eurip. Bacchae 710 and cpijvos, 
Rep. 574 p, Cratyl. 401 c, Meno 72 a. 
¢ Of. Phileb. 36 v, Theaetet. 184 a, Cratyl. 411 a. 
4 Thrasymachus speaks here for the last time. He is 
mentioned in 357 a, 358 B—c, 498 c, 545 B, 590 D. 
¢ Lit. “to smelt ore.’ The expression was proverbial 
and was explained by an obscure anecdote. Cf. Leutsch, 
Paroemiographi, ii. pp. 91, 727, and i. p. 464, and com- 

mentators on Herod. iii. 102. 
t Plato often anticipates and repels the charge of tedious 



challenging* me! What a huge debate you have 
started afresh, as it were, about this polity, in the 
supposed completion of which I was rejoicing, being 

too glad to have it accepted as I then set it 
forth! You don’t realize what a swarm? of arguments 
you are stirring up © by this demand, which I foresaw 
and evaded to save us no end of trouble.” ‘ Well,” 
said Thrasymachus,? “ do you suppose this company 
has come here to prospect for gold * and not to listen 
to discussions?” “ Yes,” I said, “in measure.” 
“ Nay, Socrates,” said Glaucon, “the measure’ of 
listening to such discussions is the whole of life for 
reasonable men. So don’t consider us, and do not 
you yourself grow weary in explaining to us what we 
ask for, your views as to how this communion of wives 
and children among our guardians will be managed, 
and also about the rearing of the children while still 
young in the interval between’ birth and formal 
schooling which is thought to be the most difficult 
part of education. Try, then, to tell us what must 
be the manner of it.” “ It is not an easy thing to 
expound, my dear fellow,” said I, “‘ for even more 
than the provisions that precede it, it raises many 
doubts. For one might doubt whether what is pro- 
posed is possible” and, even conceding the possibility,* 
one might still be sceptical whether it is best. For 
which reason one, as it were, shrinks from touching 

length (see Polit. 286 c, Phileb. 28 pv, 36 pv). Here the 
thought takes a different turn (as 504c). The 6é ye implies 
a slight rebuke (cf. Class. Phil. xiv. pp. 165-174). 

? So 498 a: Cf.on Aristoph. Acharn. 434, and Laws 792 a. 

* Cf. 456 c, Thucyd. vi. 98, Introd. xvii. 

ei 6 7: wddtora : a common formula for what a disputant 
can afford to concede. Cf. Lysias xiii. 52, xxii. 1, xxii. 10. 
It occurs six times in the Charmides. 



drreaOa, pi edxr Soxq elvar 6 Adyos, B pide 
éraipe. Mydev, 9 8 ds, dxves ote yap ayva- 
foves ovTE amuoTo. ovTe Savor of aKovadpevoL. 
Kat éyw elmov "Q dpiote, 7 mov BovAdpevos pe 
mapabappivew rAEyers; "Eywy’, édn. dav roivuv, 
nv & ey, tobvavtiov Troveis. muaTevovTos pev yap 
Euod enol <idevar & Aéyw, Kadds. clyev 7) mapa- 
E pviia: ev yap dpovipos te Kat didous mepl tav 
peyiotwy te Kal dilwy tadnOA «iddra  déyew 
aogarés Kail Oappadcov: amorotvra dé Kai ly- 
TobvTa dpa Tods Adyous TrotetaBat, 6 by eyw Spd, 
451 doBepdv te Kai odadepdov, ov te yeAwrta dddciv- 
mawduKov yap TobTd ye: aAAa pu) odadels Tis 
dAnbetas o8 povov adros adda Kat Tods didous 
€vvemiomacdpevos Keloopar mept a HKLoTa Set 
ofddrcobar. mpooxvva dé *Adpacrevavy, & Tdad- 
kwy, xapw od pedAdAw Adyew: €Amrilw yap obv édar- 
Tov auapTnua akovciws twos dovea yeverbar 7 
anateiva KadAdv re Kai ayabdv Kai diucaiwv 
vopiwy mépt. Todro ov TO KWwdvvevpa KLVdU- 

* Cf. Introd. xxxi-xxxii, infra 456 c, 499 c, 540 p, 
Laws %36 pv, Aristot. Pol. 1260 b 29, 1265 a 17 de? ev ody 
broriberOat Kar evxijv, undev pévta advvaror. 

> dyvdmoves=inconsiderate, unreasonable, as Andoc. ii. 6 

° Cf. on 452 c-p, Euthydem. 3 c * To be laughed at is no 
matter,” Laws 830 B riv rév dvonrwy yé\wra, Eurip. 
fr. 495. 

@ ’Adpdoreav: practically equivalent to Nemesis. Cf. 
our “knock on wood.” Cf. Posnansky in Breslauer Phil. 



on the matter lest the theory be regarded as nothing 
but a ‘ wish-thought,’* my dear friend.” “‘ Do not 
shrink,” he said, ‘‘ for your hearers will not be incon- 
siderate® nor distrustful nor hostile.’”’ And I said, 
“My good fellow, isthat remark intended to encourage 
me?” ‘“Itis,” he said. ‘‘ Well then,” said I, “it 
has just the contrary effect. For, if I were confident 
that I was speaking with knowledge, it would be an 
excellent encouragement. For there is both safety 
and boldness in speaking the truth with knowledge 
about our greatest and dearest concerns to those 
who are both wise and dear. But to speak when one 
doubts himself and is seeking while he talks, as I am 
doing, is a fearful and slippery venture. The fear is 
not of being laughed at,° for that is childish, but, lest, 
missing the truth, I fall down and drag my friends 
with me in matters where it most imports not to 
stumble. So I salute Nemesis,*Glaucon, in what Iam 
about to say. For, indeed,’ I believe that involun- 
tary homicide is a lesser fault than to mislead opinion 
about the honourable, the good, and the just. This 
is a risk that it is better to run with enemies’ than 
Abhandl. vy. 2, “‘ Nemesis und Adrasteia’”’: Herod. i. 35, 
Aeschyl. Prom. 936, Eurip. Rhesus 342, Demosth. xxv. 37 
kal “Adpdorecav pév dvOpwros dy éym rpooxuv. For the moral 
earnestness of what follows cf. 336 5, Gorg. 458 a, and 
Joubert apud Arnold, Essays in Crit. p. 29 “Ignorance . . . 
is in itself in intellectual matters a crime of the first order.” 

¢ yap ody, ** for in fact,” but often with the suggestion that 
the fact has to be faced, as ¢.g. in Tim. 47 ©, where the point 
is often missed. , 

* Almost proverbial. Cf. my note on Horace, Odes 
iii. 27.21. Plato is speaking here from the point of view of 
the ordinary man, and not from that of his *‘ Sermon on the 
Mount ethics.”” Cf. Phileb. 49 pv and Gorg. 480 ©, where 
Gomperz, Greek Thinkers, ii. pp. 332 and 350, goes astray. 
Cf. Class. Phil. vol. i. p. 297. 



Bvevew ev éxOpois Kpeitrrov 7 dpidous, ware ov' pe 
mapapvbe?. Kai 6 TAadkwv yeAdoas “AA, & 
Luw«pares, fy, edv tr mAVwpwev mANppEAEs B70 
Tod Aoyou, adieuev ce Worep dovov Kal Kalapov 
elvat Kal pi) atatedva Hpd@v: adda Oapphoas A€ye. 
"AAG pévror, elrov, Kabapds ye Kal éexet 6 adebeis, 
€ © , / La / ” > a“ > / 
Ws 6 vopuos A€yet- eikds 5é ye, eiep Exel, KavOdde. 
Aéye towvv, éfn, tovtov y’ evexa. Aédyew 87, 
epynv eyw, xp) avatadw ad vov, a TdTE tows ede 

C ege’fs Adyew: Taxa 5€ otTws dv dphds Exor, pera 
avdpeiov dSpdua mavTeA@s Siamrepavbev TO yuva- 
Kelov ad mepaivew, GAAws Te Kal emeLd7) Od OUTW 

III. ’AvOpazrois yap dior Kat madevbeiow ws 
jcets SinAGouev, Kar éeunv dd€av ovK €or GaAr 
jets SupABopev, pn) 7 
op0r) maidwy te Kal yuvark@v Kriais Te Kal xpeia 
7) Kar’ exeivny Tv Oppuayy todow, nvTEp 70 mp@rov 
Wpuncapev> emexerpjoayev S€ mov ws ayedAns 
dvrakas tods avdpas Kabiordva: TH Adyw. Nai. 

D ’Axkodov8Spev toivev Kal tiv yévecw Kat tpodyv 
TapamtAnciay amodwovTes, Kal oxoT@pev, ef Huiv — 
mperer 9 ov. lds; edn. “Ode. tds OndAetas — 
tav dvddKwv Kvvav rotepa EvpdvAdrrew oidpeba 
Seiv, dmep dv of appeves dvddrtwor, Kal Evv- 
Onpevew Kat taAAa Kowh mpatrew, Tas pev 

1 of Hermann: mss. ov« ef and ed, which would be ironical. 
Adam is mistaken in supposing that Glaucon laughs at 
the irony. 

* éowep marks the legal metaphor to which éxe? below 
refers. Cf. Laws 869 ©, and Eurip. Hippol. 1433 and 1448- 
1450, with Hirzel, Aixy etc. p. 191, n. 1, Demosth. xxxvii. 58-59. 
Plato transfers the idea to the other world in Phaedo 114 a-s, 
where the pardon of their victims is required for the release 



with friends, so that your encouragement is none.” 
And Glaucon, with a laugh, said, ‘* Nay, Socrates, if 
any false note in the argument does us any harm, we 
release you as? in a homicide case, and warrant you 
pure of hand and no deceiver of us. So speak on 
with confidence.” ‘‘ Well,’ said I, “he who is 
released in that case is counted pure as the law 
bids, and, presumably, if there, here too.” “‘ Speak 
on, then,” he said, “ for all this objection.” “We 
must return then,” said I, “and say now what 
perhaps ought to have been said in due sequence 
there. But maybe this way is right, that after the 
completion of the male drama we should in turn go 
through with the female,’ especially since you are so 

III. “ Formen, then, born and bred as we described, 
there is in my opinion no other right possession and 
use of children and women than that which accords 
with the start we gave them. Our endeavour, I 
believe, was to establish these men in our discourse 
as the guardians of a flock*?”” “ Yes.” “ Let us 
preserve the analogy, then, and assign them a 
generation and breeding answering to it, and see if 
it suits us or not.” ‘‘ In what way?” he said. “In 
this. Do we expect the females of watch-dogs to join 
in guarding what the males guard and to hunt with 
them and share all their pursuits or do we expect the 
of sinners. The passage is used by the older critics in the 
comparison of Plato with Christianity. 

> Sophron’s Mimes are said to have been so classified. 
For dpaua cf. also Theaetet. 150 a. 

© For the use of analogies drawn from animals ef. 375-376, 
422 p, 466 p, 467 B, 491 D-£, 537 a, 546 a-p, 564 4. Plato is 
only pretending to deduce his conclusions from his imagery. 
Aristotle’s literal-minded criticism objects that animals have 
no “*economy,”” Pol. 1264 b 4-6. 

VoL. I 2F 433 


oikoupety évdov ws advvarous Sia Tov TOV oKvAd- 
kwv TéKov te Kal tpodyv, Tods Sé moveiv Te Kal 
maoav emyeAccay exyew rept Ta Toiuvia; Kowy, 
E égn, mavta wAjv ws aobeveotépas xpwpeba, Tots 
Sé€ ws laxvporépois. Oldv 7° odv, env eyad, ent 
Ta atvta xpyobal tur Coiw, av pay Thy adriy 
tpodyv te Kal tratdetavy amodida@s; Ody oldv Te. 
Ei dpa rats yuvactiv emi radta xpynodpeba Kat 
452 Tots dvdpdot, tadra Kal Sidaxréov adrds. Na. 
Movorxi) pev' exetvois Te Kal yupvacTiKi €dd6y. 
Nai. Kai tats yuvativ dpa tovtw Ta® Téxva Kal 
Td, Teplt TOV mdAELoV amodoTEOV Kal ypnoTéov KaTa 
tavtd. Eixos e€ dv Aédyes, épn. “lows 8%, 
elzov, mapa 76 €00s yedota av daivoito 7oAAd mept 
Ta viv deyopeva, ef mpagerar H Aé&yerar. Kat 
uddra, épn. Ti, fv & eyd, yedouratov abrav 
6pas; 7 dda 81) ott yupvas Tas yuvaikas ev Tats 
B zakaiotpais yupvalopévas peta Tv avdpav, ov 
fuovov tas véas, adAa Kal 75n Tas mpeoBuTepas, 
woTep Tovs yépovtas év Tots yupvacios, oTay 
pvoot Kal pr ndeis tiv dw cuws didoyupva- 
ordow; Ni tov Aia, &hn: yeAoiov yap av, ws ye 
1 yév] Richards’ conjecture phy is attractive. 

* Reformers always denounce this source of wit while 
conservative satirists maintain that ridicule is a test of truth. 
Cf. eg. Renan, Avenir de la Science, p. 439 “* Le premier 
pas dans la carriére philosophique est de se cuirasser contre 
le ridicule,’”’? and Lucian, Piscator 14 “No harm can be 
done by a joke; that on the contrary, whatever is beautiful 
shines brighter . . . like gold cleansed,” Harmon in Loeb 
translation, iii. 22. There was a literature for and against 



females to stay indoors as being incapacitated by the 
bearing and the breeding of the whelps while the 
males toil and have all the care of the flock?” “They 
have all things in common,” he replied, “ except that 
we treat the females as weaker and the males as 
stronger.” “Is it possible, then,” said I, ‘‘ to employ 
any creature for the same ends as another if you 
do not assign it the same nurture and education?” 
“Tt is not possible.” “If, then, we are to use 
the women for the same things as the men, we must 
also teach them the same things.” “ Yes.” “‘ Now 
music together with gymnastic was the training we 
gave the men.” “Yes.” ‘Then we must assign 
these two arts to the women also and the offices of 
war and employ them in the same way.” “ It would 
seem likely from what you say,” he replied. “ Per- 
haps, then,” said I, “the contrast with present 
custom* would make much in our proposals look 
ridiculous if our words ® are to be realized in fact.” 
“Yes, indeed,” he said. ‘“‘ What then,” said I, “ is 
the funniest thing you note in them? Is it not 
obviously the women exercising unclad in the 
palestra together with the men, not only the young, 
but even the older, like old men in gymnasiums,° 
when, though wrinkled and unpleasant to look at, 
they still persist in exercising?”” “Yes, on my word,” 
he replied, “ it would seem ridiculous under present 

custom (sometimes called cuv7%ea) of which there are echoes 
in Cicero’s use of consuetudo, Acad. ii. 75, De off. i. 148, 
De nat. deor. i. 83. 

> 7 Néyerar: ef. on 389 D. 

¢ Cf. Theaetet. 162 8, and the éyxua6ys or late learner in 
Theophrastus’ Characters xxvii. 14 Loeb. Eurip. Androm. 
596 ff. denounces the light attire of Spartan women when 



ev TO TapeoT@re, pavein. Ovxodr, qv & eye, 
émetmep wpuncapev A€yew, od poBnréov Ta TOV 
XaprevTov okwppata, Coa Kal ola av etrrovev ets 
THY Tovadryy peetaBoAny yevowevny Kal TEpt Ta 
C yupvdova Kal mepl povourny Kal ovK eAdxvora 
mrepl THY TOV OTAwY ox€eow kal t inmwv dynoets. 
*Opbas, &dn, A€yets. "AAN’ émetmep Aéyew npéa- 
peba, TopevTeov mpos TO Tpaxe Tod vopmou, 
denbeioi Te Toure ay) TO abrav mparrew dAAa 
omovddlew, kal dTropvncaow, ore ob molds xpovos 
ef ob Tots “EMyow edd0Ket aicxpa elvar Kal yehoia, 
amep viv tots moAXois THv BapBapwr, yupvods av- 
Spas dpdcbat, kai éTe npyovro TOV yupvaciwy mpa- 
D toe pev Kpijres, ETELTO. Aaxedaypovior, eli Tots 
TOTE GOTELOLS TATA rabra Kwopmdeiv’ 7) n ovK oteu; 
"Eywye. "AAW’ €met01), ola, Xpwpevous dewvov 
TO dmodvecbat 708 ovyKahdarrew mdvTa Ta TOLADTA 
epavn, Kal TO ev Tots obbadpois 51) yeAotov eLeppvy 
bd Tod ev Tots Adyous pnvubevros aploTov, Kal 
TobTo evedeiEato, OTL pdtatos Os yeAotov aAXo Tt 
HyetTat ) TO KaKoV, Kal 6 yeAwTomoLety emuyeipOv 
mpos aAAnv twa oy damoBAémwv ws yedAoiov 7 
Eriv tod ddpoves te Kal KaKxod, Kail Kadod ad 
aomovddale. mpdos aAAov Tid oKoTOV OTHOdpMEVOS 7 
tov Tob ayabod. avrdmaci peév odv, dy. 
IV. *Ap’ odv od} mp@tov pev tobto mept adtav 
avoporoynréov, «i Suvvata 7) ov, Kal Soréov apde- 
aByrnow, etre tis didoTaicpwy elite aTovdacTiKOS 

« Cf. Propert. iv. 13 Miiller. 

> Fora variation of this image cf. 568 pb. 

¢ Plato plays on his own favourite phrase. The proper 
business of the wit is to raise a laugh. Cf. Symp. 189 s. 

4 Of. Thucyd. i. 6, Herod. i. 10. Sikes in Anthropology 



conditions.” ‘‘ Then,’ said I, “ since we have set out 
to speak our minds, we must not fear all the jibes* 
with which the wits would greet so great a revolu- 
tion, and the sort of things they would say about 
gymnastics and culture, and most of all about the 

ing of arms and the bestriding of horses.” 
“You're right,” he said. “ But since we have begun 
we must go forward to the rough part of our law,” 
after begging these fellows not to mind their own 
business © but to be serious, and reminding them that 
it is not long since the Greeks thought it disgraceful 
and ridiculous, as most of the barbarians @ do now, for 
men to be seen naked. And when the practice of 
athletics began, first with the Cretans and then with 
the Lacedaemonians, it was open to the wits of that 
time to make fun of these practices, don’t you think 
so?” “Ido.” “* But when, I take it, experience 
showed that it is better to strip than to veil all things 
of this sort, then the laughter of the eyes? faded away 
before that which reason revealed to be best, and 
this made it plain that he talks idly who deems any- 
thing else ridiculous but evil, and who tries to raise 
a laugh by looking to any other pattern of absurdity 
than that of folly and wrong or sets up any other 
standard of the beautiful as a mark for his seriousness 
than the good.” “ Most assuredly,” said he. 

IV. “ Then is not the first thing that we have to 
agree upon with regard tothese proposals whether they 
are possible or not? And we must throw open the de- 
bate/ to anyone who wishes either in jest or earnest to - 
and the Classics says this was borrowed from Thucydides, 
whom Wilamowitz says Plato never read. Cf. Dio Chrys. 
xiii. 226 M. For éé od cf. Demosth. iv. 3, Isoe. v. 47. 

¢ Lit. ‘* what (seemed) laughable to (in) the eyes.” 
f Cf. 607 v dotuey . . . Ndyor. 



453 e0éXex dpupoByrioar, mOTepov Suvarn Gibdiles i) 
dvOpwrivy 7 a) O7jAeva 7h Too Gppevos yevous Koww- 
vAaL els dmavra Ta epya, 7 ovd° eis &, n ets Ta 
pev ola Te, els de Ta ov, Kal TOOTO 57) TO mept TOV 
moAEpov ToTEpewv eoTiv; dp’ ovx ovTws av KdA- 
AuoTd Tis apxYdpevos ws TO ElKOS Kal KdMuora 
TeAeuTHOELEV ; IToAd Yes eby. Bovae oby, jy s 
€yw, Aets mpos pas avrovds dmep TOV dMov 
dupuoBnriowper, iva p7) Epnua Ta TOO érépov 

B Adyou ToAopKirat ; Ovdev, eon, Kwdvet. Aéyw- 
pev 67 bmép adra@v ort, ‘@ Lwxparés Te Kal 
P Aaticwv, ovdev de? dpiv dAAous dpproByreiv: 
avtol yap é€v apxh THs KaToUKiGEws, nv qnilere 
mow, coporoyeire detv Kata dvow ExaoTov Eva Ev 
TO avtod mpatrew.” “Quodroynioapev, oluar: Bs 
yap ov; "Eorw obv Omws od mapoly diadhéper 
yuvn avdpos THY piow; Ids &° od diaddper; 
Odxodv ado kal Epyov ExaTepy mpoonket m™poo- 

C tdtrew To Kata THY adTob dvow; Ti pyv;. Ids 
obv ody auapravete viv Kal Tavavtia_duiv adtots 
Aéyete, Paokovtes ad Tods dvdpas Kal Tas yuvaiKas 
deivy ta atta mpdtrew, mArcioTov Kexwproperny 
vow é€xovtas; ees Tt, ® Oavydore, mpds TadT 

@ Plato as elsewhere asks whether it is true of all, some, 
or none. So of the commingling of ideas in Sophist 251 p. 
Aristotle (Pol. 1260 b 38) employs the same would-be ex- 
haustive method. 

> dpydmevos . .« « TeXeuTHoELev: an overlooked reference to 
a proverb also overlooked by commentators on Pindar, Pyth. 
i. 35. Cf. Pindar, fr. 108 a Loeb, Laws 775 x, Sophocles, 
fr. 831 (Pearson), Antiphon the Sophist, fr. 60 (Diels). 

¢ This pleading the opponent’s case for him is common 

4.38 5 


raise the question whether female human nature 
is capable of sharing with the male all tasks or none 
at all, or some but not others,* and under which of 
these heads this business of war falls. Would not 
this be that best beginning which would naturally and 
proverbially lead to the best end?” “‘ Far the best,” 
he said. “Shall we then conduct the debate with 
ourselves in behalf of those others® so that the 
case of the other side may not be taken defence- 
less and go by default??” ‘‘ Nothing hinders,” 
he said. “Shall we say then in their behalf: 
‘There is no need, Socrates and Glaucon, of others 
disputing against you, for you yourselves at the 
beginning of the foundation of your city agreed ¢ 
that each one ought to mind as his own business the 
one thing for which he was fitted by nature?’ ‘We 
did so agree, I think; certainly!’ ‘Can it be 
denied then that there is by nature a great difference 
between men and women?’ ‘Surely there is.’ 
“Is it not fitting, then, that a different function 
should be appointed for each corresponding to this 
difference of nature?’ ‘Certainly.’ ‘ How, then, 
can you deny that you are mistaken and in contra- 
diction with yourselves when you turn around and 
affirm that the men and the women ought to do the 
same thing, though their natures are so far apart?’ 
Can you surprise me with an answer to that ques- 

in Plato. Cf. especially the plea for Protagoras in Theaetet, 

¢ Apparently a mixture of military and legal phraseology. 
Cf. éxrépoy in Protag. 340 a, ll. v. 140 ra 5° épjua poSeira, 
and the legal phrase é¢ojunv xatadiacray or ddXetv. 

* guoroyeire: cf. 369 E f. For xara giow cf, 370 c and 
456 c, The apparent emphasis of ¢veis in this book is of 
little significance. Cf. Laws, passim, 




dmodoyetcbar; ‘Qs pev eCaidrys, edn, od mdve 
pddvov: aAAa ood Senoopat TE Kal Séopa Kal Tov 
d7rép jpav Adyov, doris TOT eoTiv, épunvedoa. 
Tad?’ early, jv 8 oe ey, @ Pravcwr, kat adda 
moXa, Towabra,, a éyd) mdaXAau mpoop@v epoBotpny 
TE Kal WKVOUY dnreoba Too VO}LOv Too Tept THY 
TOv yuvaucdy Kal mraidcov KTHOwW Kal Tpopiv. 
Ou ped. tov Aia, édy, ov (yap evKodw € EouKev. 63 
yap, €lzov: dAAd 57) oo Exel av Te TLS els Kodup- 
ByOpav puxpav euméon av Te €is TO peyroTov 
meAayos pecov, dpws ye vel oddev Arrov. Lavy 
pev odv. Odxodv kal jpuiv vevotéov Kal metpatéov 
odleoba ex Tot Adyou, Aro SeAdivd twa €Ami- 
lovras Huds tbroAaBeiv av 4 twa addAnv amopov 
owrnpiav. “Eouxev, epn. Dépe 84, Hv & eye, 
edv 7 evpwpev THY E€odov. wyodroyotpev yap 57) 
aAAny vow dAdo delv emuTndevew, yuvaikos de 
Kal avSpos dAAnv elvat: Tas d€ aAAas pvoeus Ta 
avTa papev vov deiv emurndeboat, Tatra Tav 
KaTnyopelre ; Komoi ye. °H yervaia, jv & Yes 
® TAavcwv, 7 ddvayts tis dvthoyuris TEXVTS. 
Ti 64; “Orv, elzrov, Soxodot pou eis adriy Kat 
akovtes ToAAol euminrew Kai olecBar odK épilew, 
dAAa SiadréyeoBar, dua TO px) S¥vacbar Kat’ «€idn 
Svarpovpevor TO Aeydpevov emiaKomeiv, aAAd KaT 

@ Of. the ré\ayos Tov Noywv Protag. 338 a. Similarly Sidney 
Smith: ** cut his cable, and spread his enormous canvas, and 
launch into the wide sea of reasoning eloquence.” 

> Anallusion to the story of Arion and the dolphin in Herod. 
i, 24, as Uro\aBeiy perhaps proves. For dropor cf. 378 a. 

¢ yevvaia: often as here ironical in Plato. Cf. Sophist 231 s, 
where interpreters misunderstand it. But the new L. & S. 
is correct, 

4 gvridoyiKfs: one of several designations for the eristic 



tion?” ‘ Not easily on this sudden challenge,” he 
replied: “ but I will and do beg you to lend your 
voice to the plea in our behalf, whatever it may be.” 
“These and many similar difficulties, Glaucon,’’ said 
I, “ I foresaw and feared, and so shrank from touch- 
ing on the law concerning the getting and breeding of 
women and children.” “It does not seem an easy 
thing, by heaven,” he said, “no, by heaven.” “No, 
it is not,” said I; “ but the fact is that whether one 
tumbles into a little diving-pool or plump into the 
great sea he swims all the same.” “ By all means.” 
“ Then we, too, must swim and try to escape out of 
_ the sea? of argument in the hope that either some 
dolphin® will take us on its back or some other 
desperate rescue.’’ “So it seems,’ he said. ““Come 
then, consider,” said I, “ if we can find a way out. We 
did agree that different natures should have differing 
pursuits and that the nature of men and women 
differ. And yet now we affirm that these differing 
natures should have the same pursuits. That is the 
indictment?” “It is.” ‘“‘ What a grand° thing, 
Glaucon,” said I, “ is the power of the art of contra- 
diction?!” “Why so?” “Because,” said I, “‘ man 
appear to me to fall into it even against their wills, 
and to suppose that they are not wrangling but 
arguing, owing to their inability to apply the proper 
divisions and distinctions to the subject under con- 
which Isocrates maliciously confounds with dialectic while 
Plato is careful to distinguish them. Cf. E. S. Thompson, 
The Meno of Plato, Excursus V., pp. 272 ff. and the introduc- 
tion to E. H. Gifford’s Euthydemus, p. 42. Among the 
marks of eristic are the pursuit of merely verbal oppositions 
as here and Euthydem. 278 a, 301 8, Theaetet. 164; the 
neglect to distinguish and divide, Phileb. 17 a, Phaedr. 265 , 
266 a, 8; the failure to distinguish the hypothesis from its 
consequences, Phaedo 101 e, Parmen, 135-136. 


9; A 8. we 7 ~ ‘ A > , 
avTo TO dvopa SuwKew Tod AexOEvTos TV evavTiw- 
ow, epid., od dSiaddkrw mpos aAArjAovs ypdpevor. 
” \ 7 v A ~ 

Eort yap 54, bn, mept oAdods Tobto TO 7aBos- 
\ ~ A A ¢ ~ ~ ~ 
a p@v Kal mpos Huds todro Teiver ev TH 
/ Z Il /, A > 8° > 4 } 
B rapovtt; Tlavrdzaci pev obv, qv 8 eyw: Kwdv- 
vevouev yoy aKxovtes avtiroyias anteoOar. Ids; 
\ \ ” ~ ~ cal 
To thy GAAnv dvow ott od Tdv abradv Set éem- 
TndevpaTwY TUyydvew dv avdpelws Te Kal 
> ~ 
EploTiK@s KATA TO Gvoya SudKopev, erreckeapela 
A Tey” ¢ ~ / A ~ e ‘ = 
5€ 00d’ dmnodbv, ti eldos TO THs ETépas TE Kal THs 
7 A 4 \ ‘ / ~ , /, 
abtis dicews Kal mpos Ti Teivov wprloucba TOTE, 
id 4 > , »” , A ~ 35 
Ore Ta emiTndedpata adAn dvoe ara, TH Se 
>, A \ > \ > A > A => ” 
atth Ta avdTa amedidomev. OD yap ody, Edy, 
C émeoxersdpcba. Tovydpto, elrov, e€eorw jpiv, 
Ws €oikev, avepwrav Huds adbrovs, ei 7 abt? Pvats 
dadaxpav Kai Kount@v Kal ody % evavTia, Kal 
> \ ¢ A > / 3A ‘ 
everday duodoy@pev evavtiav elvar, eav padaxpot 
OKUTOTOUAL, 7) eGv KounTas, €av 8 ad Kopyrat, 
\ ‘ ef a , > bal ” ” 
un tods étépovs. Tedotov pévr’ av etn, edn. 

TA > tAA t > tA Xr ~ na oF / 

pa kat’ dAdo tt, elrov eye, yedotov, 7 OTL TOTE 

od mavTws THv adtiy Kal thy érépav dvow 
ériéwcba, adr’ éxeivo 70 <ldos THs dAAoWwoEWS TE 


D kai dpouscews povov edvddtropev TO mpds adTa 
a 4 
Teivov Ta emiTndedpata; olov iatpiKoy pev Kab 

@ dxovres is almost “ unconscious.”* Cf. Phileb. 14 c. 

> Greek style often couples thus two adverbs, the second 
defining more specifically the first, and, as here and often 
in Plato and Aristophanes, with humorous or paradoxical 
effect. Cf. Aristoph. Knights 800 ¢6 xai wiapas. So Shakes. 
‘* well and chirurgeonly.” 

¢ Cf. Sophist 256 a-s for the relativity of ‘“‘same” and 
* other.”’ Polit. 292 c describes in different language the 
correct method. 

4 For this humorously trivial illustration cf. Mill, Rep. Gov, 




sideration. They pursue purely verbal oppositions, 
practising eristic, not dialectic on one another.” 
“Yes, this does happen to many,” he said; “ but 
does this observation apply to us too at present?” 
“ Absolutely,” said I; “‘ at any rate I am afraid 
that we are unawares? slipping into contentiousness.”’ 
“In what way?” “ The principle that natures not 
the same ought not to share in the same pursuits we 
are following up most manfully and eristically ° in the 
literal and verbal sense; but we did not delay to 
consider at all what particular kind of diversity and 
identity ° of nature we had in mind and with reference 
to what we were trying to define it when we assigned 
different pursuits to different natures and the same 
to the same.” ‘‘ No, we didn’t consider that,” he 
said. ‘“‘ Wherefore, by the same token,” I said, ““ we 
might ask ourselves Ciathnée the natures of bald? and 
long-haired men are the same and not, rather, the 
contrary. And, after agreeing that they were 
opposed, we might, if the bald cobbled, forbid the 
long-haired to do so, or vice versa.” “‘ That would be 
ridiculous,” he said. ‘Would it be so,” said I, “for 
any other reason than that we did not then posit like- 
ness and difference of nature in any and every sense, 
but were paying heed solely to the kind of diversity 
and homogeneity that was pertinent ¢ to the pursuits 
themselves? We meant, for example, that a man and 

chap. viii: p. 190: ‘*I have taken no account of difference 
of sex. I consider it to be as entirely irrelevant to political 
- rights as difference in height, or in the colour of the hair; ” 
and Mill’s disciple Leslie Stephen, The English Utilitarians, 
i. 291: ‘*We may at least grant that the burden of proof 
should be upon those who would disfranchise all red-haired 
* Cf. Laches 190 p eis 6 reivew doxei, Protag. 345 B. 



larpuKny Tv poxny évTas THY adriy pvow € Exew 
eréyomev* 7) ovK ole; "Eywye. “larpuxov dé Kai 
textovikov aAAnv; Ildvtws mov. 
V. Odxodr, ip o° eye, Kal 70 Tav dvdpav Kal 
70 TOV yuvark@v yévos, €av ev pos réXVY TWa 
7 aAdo emTOevpa dvapepov paivnrat, TovTO xz) 
dioouer Exatépw deiv dmobwovat, eav 8 atta 
ToUTw paivyrat Svadeperv, 7@ To ev OnXrv Tike, 
E76 8€ appev oxevew, ovdev rt mw pyocowev wardov 
dmodedetx Oar, ws mpos 6 tpets A€yopev Suadeper 
yuvr) avdpos, aw ETL olnaopeba detv Ta avTa 
emiTyndevew Tovs Te PUAaKas Hiv Kal TAs yuvatKkas 
avta@v. Kai op0ds, &ébn. Odxodv peta rtoiro 
KeAcvopev TOV Ta evar la Aéyovra TodTo avTo 
455 diddonew 7 Gs, pos Tiva TeX 7 ti emTdevpa 
Tov mept moAews KATACKEUTY | obx 7 adty adda 
érépa dois yuvaikds te Kat avopds; Aikatov 
yotv. Tdya toivuy av, dmep od dAlyov mpdtepov 
” ” ” \ »” Lid > \ ~ 
€Xeyes, elo av Kat aAAos, OTe Ev prev TH Trapa- 
xXphua ixavds ciety od pad.ov, emioKxeapevw de 
> \ / ” \ 4 / s 4 
ovoev yaderov. Eizor yap dv. BovAe ody dew- 
pe0a tod Ta ToLwatra avtiAeyovtos aKodovbfoat 
c a 27 ¢ a > / ? / Ld > / 
B jpiv, éav mws Hpets exeivw evderkdpela, dT ovdev 
€oTw eémitndevpa idvov yuvaiki mpos dtoiknow 
/ / 7 ‘ > 'é 
Toews ; Ildve ve "Tu dn, pjjoopev Tpos adrov, 
dzroKpivou: dpa ovTws edeyes Tov pev evhvh mpds 
Tt elvat, Tov dé adn, ev @ 6 pev padiws Tt 

@ Adam makes difficulties, but cf. Laws 963 4 votv... 
KuBepynrixoy pev Kal iarpixdv kal otparnyxdvy. The translation 
follows Hermann despite the objection that this reading 
forestalls the next sentence. Cf. Campbell ad loc. and Apelt, 
Woch. fiir klass. Phil., 1903, p. 344. 

® Plato anticipates the objection that the Socratic dialectic 



a woman who have a physician’s? mind have the 
same nature. Don’t youthink so?” “Ido.” “But 
that a man physician and a man carpenter have 
different natures?” «Certainly, I suppose.” 

_V. “ Similarly, then,” said I, “ if it appears that the 
male and the female sex have distinct qualifications for 
any arts or pursuits, we shall affirm that they ought to 
be assigned respectively to each. But if it appears 
that they differ only in just this respect that the 
female bears and the male begets, we shall say that no 
proof has yet been produced that the woman differs 
from the man for our purposes, but we shall continue 
to think that our guardians and their wives ought to 
follow the same pursuits.” ‘‘ And rightly,” said he. 
“ Then, is it not the next thing to bid our opponent 
tell us precisely for what art or pursuit concerned 
with the conduct of a state the woman’s nature 
differs from the man’s?’’ ‘“‘ That would be at any 
rate fair.” ‘“‘ Perhaps, then, someone elst, too, 
might say what you were saying a while ago, that it 
is not easy to find a satisfactory answer on a sudden,? 
but that with time for reflection there is no difficulty.” 
“He might say that.” “Shall we, then, beg the 
raiser of such objections to follow us, if we may 
perhaps prove able to make it plain to him that there 
is no pursuit connected with the administration of a 
state that is peculiar to woman?” “ By all means.” 
“Come then, we shall say to him, answer our 
question. Was this the basis of your distinction 
between the man naturally gifted for anything and 
the one not so gifted—that the one learned easily, 
surprises assent. Cf. more fully 487 8, and for a comic 
version Hippias Major 295 a “if I could go off for a little 

by myself in solitude I would tell you the answer more 
precisely than precision itself.” por 


/ e A ~ A c A > ‘ 
pavOdvor, 6 5é xyader@s, Kal 6 ev amd Bpayetas 
pabnoews emt mod ebpeTuKos ety od euabev, 6 be 
ToAARs pabiocws TUXeY Kat pederns pnd a 
enabe oaloiro, Kal TO pev Ta 708 owLaTos ixavOs 

C dmnpetot 7H Siavoia, 7 de €vavTLotro ; dp’ GAN’ 
ara éorly  Tadra, ols Tov evpuny m™pos ekaoTa 
Kal Tov pr wpilov; Oddeis, 7 8 ds, adAa dyoet. 
Oicba tu odv tro avOpuTav pedetdpevov, eV @ 
od mavTa TadTa TO THY avdpav yéevos Siadhepovtws 
exet 7) TO TOV yuvaikdv; 7 paxpoAoyOpev THY 
te dhavtixny A€yovtes Kal THY TOY ToTaVWV TE 

D kai ébnudtwv Oepareiav, ev ois dy tr SoKet TO 
yuvaiketov yévos elvat, ob Kai karayeAaororarov 
€OTt TAVTWV TTC LEVOY ; “AAn Ih, eon, Aéyets, 6 OTe 
moNd Kparetrat év amraow as mos eimetv TO yevos 
Tob ~yévous. yuvaixes péev Tow TroAAat moAA@v 
> ~ / > / A \ a ” ¢ 
avOp @v Bedrious eis moh TO de ddov exel ws 
ov Noes: Odvdev dpa éoriv, é pire, emiTydevpa 
TOV TOALW SvoucovvTwv yuvarKos dudte ‘yuri, ove" 
avopos dvdr avip, add’ dpoiws Sveomrappeva at 
pvaeis ev dpotv tov Cwouw, Kal mavTo pev 
peTexer yern emiTnSevpatov KaTa puow, TaVvT@V 

Ed€ avyp, én mat de dobevéorepov yuvt) avdpos. 
Ilavu Ye: *H_ ody dvdpaou Tava. mpooTdagopev, 

> > 
yuvaikt dé ovdev; Kai ws; “AAA” eote yap, 

@ Cf. Polit. 286 x, where thisis said to be the object of teaching. 

> Cf. Protag. 326 B, Rep. 498 B, 410 c, Isoc. xv. 180, Xen. 
Mem. ii. 1. 28. 

* On the alleged superiority of men even in women’s 
occupations of. the amusing diatribe of the old bachelor in 
George Eliot’s Adam Bede, chap. xxi.: ‘I tell you there 
isn’t a thing under the sun that needs to be done at all but 
what a man can do better than women, unless it’s bearing 
children, and they do that in a poor makeshift way,” and 


the other with difficulty; that the one with slight 
instruction could discover* much for himself in the 
matter studied, but the other, after much instruction 
and drill, could not even remember what he had 
learned; and that the bodily faculties of the one 
adequately served ® his mind, while, for the other, the 
body was a hindrance? Were there any other points 
than these by which you distinguish the well 
endowed man in every subject and the poorly 
endowed?” “Noone,” said he, “will be able to name 
any others.” “Do you know, then, of anything 
practised by mankind in which the masculine sex 
does not surpass the female on all these points ?°¢ 
Must we make a long story of it by alleging weaving 
and the watching of pancakes and the boiling pot, 
whereon the sex plumes itself and wherein its defeat 
will expose it to most laughter ? ” “You are right,” 

he said, “‘ that the one sex? is far surpassed by the 
other in everything, one may say. Many women, it 
is true, are better than many men in many things, 
but broadly speaking, it is as you say.” ‘“‘ Then 
there is no pursuit of the administrators of a state 
that belongs to a woman because she is a woman or 
to a man because he is a man. But the natural 
capacities are distributed alike among both creatures, 
and women naturally share in all pursuits and men in 
all—yet for all the woman is weaker than the man.’ 

* Assuredly.” ‘‘ Shall we, then, assign them all to 
men and nothing to women?” “ How could we?” 
“We shall rather, I take it, say that one woman has 
the remarks on women as cooks of the bachelor Nietzsche, 
Beyond Good and Evil, § 234. But Xen. Mem. iii. 9. 11 
takes the ordinary view. On the character of women 

generally cf. Laws 781 and Aristotle in Zeller trans. ii. 215. 
* Cf. Cratyl. 392 c as rd Sdov eireiv yévos. 







z, e , \ \ 3? , > ” \ 
oluar, Ws djcopev, Kal yuv7) larpiKy, 7 5° ov, Kal 
povoiky, 7 8° dpovoos dice. Ti phv; Tvpva- 
\ > Ed av 29. 7 ¢ \ > P 
otTiK?) 8 dpa ov, ovdde TroAcuLKH, 7) 5€ amoAELos 
Kal od gidoyupvaotixyn; Oliuar eywye. Ti dé; 
dirddaodds re Kal pucocodos; Kal Avpoedys, 7 
8 dB@vyos; "Eat cai tatra. "Eotw apa Kat 
dvdakiky yuvy, 7 8 ov. 7 od TovadTynv Kal TOV 
> ~ ~ ~ 7, > / , 
avdpdv trav dudakikdv dvow e€eAcEdpela; Torav- 

v pev odv. Kai yuvaikds dpa kat avdpos 7 adr?) 

, > \ / \ a > / 
dvats eis dvdakiy mdoAews, 7AjV doa acbeveoréepa 
7 loxvpotepa éeotiv. Daiverar. 

VI. Kai yuvatkes dpa at tovabra Tots TovodTous 
> / > /, A ‘ / 
avdpaow éxArextéat Evvoikeiv Te Kal EvpvdAdrrew, 
émeimep cio ixaval Kat Evyyevets avtots THV 

, #. \ > > / > \ 
dvow. Ilavy ye. Ta 8 émirndedpata od Ta 

; See! > / a > a U4 \ . aed 
atta amodotéa tais adrais diceow; Ta adra. 
“Hropev dpa eis Ta mpotepa mepipepopevor, Kat 
Spodroyodpev pur) mapa dvow elvar tats Tav dv- 
AdKwv yvvaEi povoikyy Te Kal yupvaoTiKTPY 
> , / A > > »” > 7 
amodiSevat. Ilavtdmact pev otv. Ovx dpa adv- 
vad ye ovd€ edyais Suota evopobeTobper, emetzep 
Kara dvow érifewev Tov vomov: aAAa Ta vov Tapa 
TatdTa yuyvopeva mapa dvow paddov, ws €orke, 
ylyverat. “Kouxev. Odxodv 1) emioxefus jyiv jv, 
> 4 \ / , F 4 
et Suvatd te Kat BéAtiota Adyoev; “Hv yap. 

Kat 6r pev 8) Svvard, Sumpodrdynta; Nav. 
@ \ \ , ‘ \ ~ 8 Lal Py 
Or. d€ 81) BéAticTa, TO peta TodTo det dtopo- 
AoynOjva; Afrov. Odxodv mpds ye To dvda- 

\ a , > ” \ © a> Ow 5 
KLKQ)V YUVALKa yeveobat OUK aAAn ev pW av pas 

@ Cf. Gorg. 517 c. > Cf. on 450 D. 
¢ Cf, Introd. p. xvii. 



the nature of a physician and another not, and one 
is by nature musical, and another unmusical?”’ 
* Surely.” ‘‘ Can we, then, deny that one woman is 
naturally athletic and warlike and another unwarlike 
and averse to gymnastics?” “Ithinknot.” “ And 
again, one a lover, another a hater, of wisdom? And 
one high-spirited, and the other lacking spirit ? ” 
“ That also is true.”” “ Then it is likewise true that 
one woman has the qualities of a guardian and 
another not. Were not these the natural qualities 
of the men also whom we selected for guardians ? ”’ 
“They were.” ‘‘ The women and the men, then, 
have the same nature in respect to the guardianship 
of the state, save in so far as the one is weaker, the 
other stronger.” ‘“‘ Apparently.” 

VI. ““ Women of this kind, then, must be selected to 
cohabit with men of this kind and to serve with them 
as guardians since they are capable of it and akin by 
nature.” “By all means.” “And to the same 
natures must we not assign the same pursuits?” 
“The same.” ‘“‘We come round,? then, to our 
previous statement, and agree that it does not run 
counter to nature to assign music and gymnastics 
to the wives of the guardians.” ‘“‘ By all means.” 
“ Our legislation, then, was not impracticable or 
utopian,” since the law we proposed accorded with 
nature. Rather, the other way of doing things, 
prevalent to-day, proves, as it seems, unnatural.” 
“ Apparently.” “‘ The object of our inquiry was the 
possibility and the desirability ° of what we were pro- 
posing?” “It was.” “That it is possible has been 
admitted.” “Yes.” “The next point to be agreed 
upon is that it is the best way.” ‘‘ Obviously.” “For 
the production of a female guardian, then, our educa- 

VOL. I 26 449 


mowjoer mrawdela, aAAn dé yuvatkas, aAAws TE Kal 

D tiv adbriv dvow rapadaBodca; Od« adXAyn. Ids 

obv exes Sd€ns TO ToLwwobde wept; Tivos 64; Tod 
broAapPdavew Tapa ceavT® Tov pev ayeivw avdpa, 
Tov de xelpw* 7) mdvrTas dpolovs Hyet; Oddapds. 
"Ev obv TH moder, Hv @Kilopev, TOTEpov oleL Hiv 
dpetvous avdpas e€eipydcba tods dvAakas Tvxov- 
tas 7s SinAdopev madeias, 7) Tods GKUTOTOMOUS 
Th oKxvutTiKh madevbertas; Tedoiov, éfy, epwras. 

E Mavéavw, ednv: ti dé; tv GAAwy moditav ody 


odtoe apiotor; IloAd ye. Ti 5€; ai yuvatkes 
TOV yvvatkav ody adtar €oovrar BeAriotar; Kai 
a ” / ” / / »” nn 
tobto, éfn, odd. “Eote 5é€ te mode apewov 7 
yuvaikds Te Kal avdpas ws apiorous eyyiyvecbat; 
Otn gorw. Totro 5€ woven Te Kal yupvacTiKn 
Tapayuyvopevat, ws nwets SuiAGopev, atrepydoovrat ; 
~ > A > / »” A > A ‘ 
&s 8 ov; Od povov dpa dvvarov ddAa Kai 
»” / , a A > 
dpiotov moAe vopyov étifenev. Ottws. *Amo- 
dutéov 81) tais THv dvddkwv yvvativ, émeimep 
> A > Ve , > ‘ 
dperyy avTt yLariov applecovTat, Kal Kowwvntéov 
/, ~ La ~ lol 
moA€uov Te Kal THs GAAns dvdAakis THs mEpt THY 
/ ‘ P] 4 / # > > ~ 
moAw, Kat odk dAXa mpaxtéov: TovTwy 8 adTav 
\ > / a“ ‘ nan a > ( / 
Ta eAadpotepa Tats yuvargiv 7 Tots avdpaar doréov 

\ \ ~ / > / ¢ A ~ 2% 2 SS 
B d:a tHv Tod yévous aobéverav: 6 S€ yeA@r avyp emt 

yupvais yuvaki, Tob Bedriorov evexa yupvalo- 

¢ This is only a more complicated case of the point of 
style noted on 349 p. Cf. Cratyl. 386 a, Sophist 247 a. 

> Cf. on 421 a. We should not press this incidental 
phrase to prove that Plato would not educate all the citizens, 
as he in fact does in the Laws and by implication in the 

¢ Cf. Morley, Voltaire, p. 103: ‘“*It has been rather the 
fashion to laugh at the Marquise de Chatelet, for no better 
reason than that she, being a woman, studied Newton... . 



tion will not be one thing for men and another for 
women, especially since the nature which we hand 
over to it is the same.” “There will be no differ- 
ence.” ‘‘ How are you minded, now, in this matter?” 
“In what?” “In the matter of supposing some 
men to be better and some worse,* or do you think 
them all alike?” ‘By no means.” “ In the city, 
then, that we are founding, which do you think will 
prove the better men, the guardians receiving the 
education which we have described or the cobblers 
educated by the art of cobbling®?” “ An absurd 
question,” he said. “I understand,” said 1; “ and 
are not these the best of all the citizens?” “ By 
far.” ‘‘ And will not these women be the best of all 
the women?” “They, too, by far.’ “Is there 
anything better for a state than the generation in it 
of the best possible women‘* and men?” “ There 
is not.” ‘‘ And this, music and gymnastics applied 
as we described will effect.” “Surely.” “ Then 
the institution we proposed is not only possible but 
the best for the state.” “Thatis so.” “The women 
of the guardians, then, must strip, since they will 
be clothed with virtue as a garment,’ and must take 
their part with the men in war and the other duties 
of civic guardianship and have no other occupation. 
But in these very duties lighter tasks must be assigned 
‘to the women than to the men because of their weak- 
ness as a class. But the man who ridicules unclad 
women, exercising because it is best that they 
There is probably nothing which would lead to so rapid and 
marked an improvement in the world as a large increase of 
the number of women in it with the will and the capacity 
to master Newton as thoroughly as she did.” 

2 Cf. Rousseau, Lettre a d’Alembert, ‘Couvertes de 
Yhonnéteté publique.” 



peévats, Grex Too yeAotou Spémrav Kapmov, oddev 
oldev, ws Eouer, ep @ yerg od’ 6 Tt mparree’ 
KdAdoTa yap 51) Tobro Kat A€yerau Kal AcAeEeTaL, 
Ld ‘ A > / / A A A 
ore TO pev WdhéApov Kaddv, TO Se BAaBepov 
aiaxpov. Ilavrdzact pev odv. 

VII. Toiro pev toivey év dorep Kipa Padpev 
Suadedyewv, Tob yuvaikelov Tépt vouov A€yovres, 
WOTE yn) TavTaTact katarAvobivat TuevTas, ws 
Set Kou} mdvra émuTndeveww TOUS Te dvAaxkas 7) jpv 
Kal tas dvdAakidas, aAAd myn Tov Adyov avTov 

c “A ¢ a e€ / A > , 
aiT@ oporoyeicba, ws Svvatad te Kat wdhedApma 
déyer; Kai pdda, eon, oD opiKpov Koa d.a- 
pevyets. Dijoers ye, a & eyw, od péya adro 
elvat, OTav TO pera TobTo ions. Aéye on, dw, 
édn. Tovtw, hv & eye, Emerat vopos Kal Tots Eu- 

a ” ¢ > Ss bd / \ 
mpoolev Trois dAdo, ws ey@pat, dde. Tis; Tas 
yuvaikas tavtas Tv avdp@v tovtwv mdavTwr 

@ Cf. Pindar, fr. 209 Schroeder, are\j codias Kxapmdv 
Spéx(ew). Plato varies the quotation to suit his purpose. 

> This is one of the chief texts for the alleged utilitarianism 
of Plato, a question too complicated to be settled by anything 
less than a comparative study of the Protagoras, Gorgias, 
Phaedo, Philebus, Republic (1X) and Laws. odéd.yor sug- 
gests “* ‘benefit ” rather than “utility.” Cf. Introd. to second 
volume of this translation, and supra on 339 a-s. 

¢ Cf. Aeschyl. Septem, in fine. 

@ For this form of exaggeration ef. supra on 414c, 339 B. _ 

¢ On the whole topic ef. Introd. p. xxxiv, Lucian, Fugitivi 
18 ovx eiddres Srws 6 lepds éxetvos jélov Kowds qyeioOa Tas 
yuwaikas, Epictet. fr. 53, p. 21, Rousseau, Emile, v: “je 
ne parle point de cette prétendue communauté de femmes 
dont le reproche tant répété prouve que ceux qui le lui font 
ne l’ont jamais lu.” But Rousseau dissents violently from 
what he calls “cette promiscuité civile qui confond partout 
les deux sexes dans les mémes emplois.” Cf. further the 
denunciations of the Christian fathers passim, who are 
outdone by De Quincey’s ** Otaheitian carnival of licentious 


should, “ plucks the unripe? fruit’ of laughter and 
does not know, it appears, the end of his laughter nor 
what he would be at. For the fairest thing that is 
said or ever will be said is this, that the helpful is 
fair® and the harmful foul.” “* Assuredly.” 

VII. “ In this matter, then, of the regulation of 
women, we may say that we have surmounted one of 
the waves of our paradox and have not been quite 
swept¢ away by it in ordaining that our guardians and 
female guardians must have all pursuits in common, 
but that in some sort the argument concurs with itself 
in the assurance that what it proposes is both possible 
and beneficial.” “It is no slight wave that you are 
thus escaping.” “You will not think it a great ? one,” 
I said, “ when you have seen the one that follows.” 
“Say on then and show me,” said he. “ This,” 
said I, “ and all that precedes has for its sequel, in 
my opinion, the following law.” “‘ What?” “That 
these women shallall be common ‘® to allthese men, and 
appetite, connected with a contempt of human life which is 
excessive even for paganism.” 

Most of the obvious parallels between Plato and Aristo- 
phanes’ Ecclesiazusae follow as a matter of course from the 
very notion of communal marriage and supply no evidence for 
the dating of a supposed earlier edition of the whole ora part of 
the Republic. In any case the ideas of the Republic might 
have come to Aristophanes in conversation before publication: 
and the Greeks knew enough of the facts collected in such 
books as Westermarck’s Marriage, not to be taken altogether 
by surprise by Plato’s speculations. Cf. Herod: iv. 104, and 
Aristot. Pol. 1262 a 20. Cf. further Adam’s exhaustive dis- 
cussion in the appendix to this book, Grube, “The Marriage 
Laws in Plato’s Republic,” Classical Quarterly, 1927, pp. 
95 ff.,Teichmiiller, Literarische Fehden,i. p. 19 n.,and themore 
recent literature collected in Praechter-Ueberweg, 12th ed. i. 
p. 207, Péhimann, Geschichte der Sozialenfrage und des Sozia- 
lismus in der antiken Welt, ii. p. 578, Pohlenz, Aus Platon’s 
Werdezeit, pp. 225-228, C. Robert, Hermes lvii. pp. 351 ff. 






maoas elvat Kowds, idia be pndevi pn deptav 
ouvoueiy: Kat Tovs maidas av Kowous, Kal pre 
yovea éxyovov €idévar Tov abrob PATE maida 
yovéa. Ilodu, edn, TovTO éxcetvov jretCov ™pos 
amiotiav Kal Too Suvatod mépu Kal To wWdhedApov. 
Odn olua, jv Ss eyo, mrept ye Too cwopeAijiov 
dudoByretobar a av, ws ov peylorov dyabov Kowas 
pev Tas _yevatras elvat, Kowovs bé TOUS maidas, 
elrrep oldv Te GAN’ olpar mepl Tod ef Suvarov 7) pH) 
mActorny duproByrnow | av yevéobar. Ilepi dudo- 
TEpwv, 7 7 O° Os, €D par av dpupeo Byrn Betn. Aéyets, 
iy Ss eye, Aoyov Evoraow: eyw 8° @unv Ex ye 
Tob €Tépou amrodpacecbat, et aor SdEerev wWheApov 
elvar, Aowrov 5é 5H por EceoOar mepi tod Suvarod 
kat un. °AAN odk eAabes, 7 S ds, aodipaoKkwr, 
GAN’ dapudotépwv mépt didov Adyov. ‘Ydexréov, 
qv 8 éeyw, diknv. roodvde pévtor xdpioai joe’ 
€aodv pe €optdoat, wWamep of apyol tiv Sdidvovav 
ciWbacow éotidcba bd’ éavTdv, d6tav ovor mopev- 
wvTal. Kal yap ot Tovodrot mov, mplv e€evpetv, 
Tiva Tpomov é€oTar TL wv emiOvpodor, TodTO map- 
evtes, iva HN KapVvwot Bovievopevor mepl TOO 
duvatod Kai 7, bévres Ws brdpyov eivat 6  Bou- 
Aovrat, 77 wa Aoura dvaTdrrovar kat xalpovor 
Siebapees ola Spdcovar yevoLevov, apyov Kal 
GdAws yuynv ert apyotépav movwdvtes. On odv 

@ A distinct suggestion of the topics of the ‘* useful” and 
the ** possible ’’ in Aristotle’s Rhetoric. 

Cf. Isoc. ii, 47, on “those who in solitude do not 
delibesate but imagine what they wish,” and Chesterton’s 
saying, * All feeble spirits live in the future, because it isa 
soft job”; cf. further on day-dreams, Schmidt, Hthik der 



that none shall cohabit with any privately ; and that 
the children shall be common, and that no parent 
shall know its own offspring nor any child its parent.” 
“This is a far bigger paradox than the other, and 
provokes more distrust as to its possibility and its 
utility.*”’ ‘‘ I presume,” said I, “ that there would 
be no debate about its utility, no denial that the 
community of women and children would be the 
greatest good, supposing it possible. But I take it 
that its possibility or the contrary would be the chief 
topic of contention.” “‘ Both,’ he said, “* would be 
right sharply debated.” ‘‘ You mean,” said I, “* that 
I have to meet a coalition of arguments. But I 
expected to escape from one of them, and that if you 
agreed that the thing was beneficial, it would remain 
for me to speak only of its feasibility.”” ““You have 
not escaped detection,” he said, ‘“‘ in your attempted 
flight, but you must render an account of both.” “I 
must pay the penalty,” I said, “* yet do me this much 
grace: Permit me to take a holiday, just as men of 
lazy minds are wont to feast themselves on their own 
thoughts when they walk alone.’ Such persons, 
without waiting to discover how their desires may 
be realized, dismiss that topic to save themselves the 
labour of deliberating about possibilities and im- 
possibilities, assume their wish fulfilled, and proceed 
to work out the details in imagination, and take 
pleasure in portraying what they will do when it is 
realized, thus making still more idle a mind that is 
idle without that.* I too now succumb to this weak- 

Griechen, ii. p. 71, and Lucian’s Il\ofov # evxai. Plato’s 
description anticipates the most recent psychology in every- 
thing except the term “autistic thinking.” 
¢ dd\A\ws: of. infra 495 B. 


B kai adros parBarilopar, Kal ékeiva prev emOupe@ 
dvaBaréobar Kal dorepov emokepacbat, Hh Suvard, 
vov oe ws duvaT@v dvtwv Geis oKepouat, av pot 
Trapins, 7s dvara£ovow avTa ot dpxovres yuyve- 
preva, Kal OTL mavTov Eupgpoparar’ av «in m™pax- 
Oévra. Th TONE Kat tois pvAaékt. Taira metpa- 
copat got mporepa ovvdiacKoretabar, voTepa 5 
exeiva, elmep mapins. "AAG apinut, edn, Kal 
oxdmer. Oiwar toivuv, jv 8° eyo, velrep eoovrat 

C oi dpxovtes aétor tovrov tod dvdpmatos, ot TE 
TovTols emixoupor KaTa TavTd, Tods pev eVEeAjoe 
Toleiy Ta emiTaTToOpeva, TOds dé emuTa€ew, TA [ev 
adrovs mrevBopevous Tots vomots, TA Sé€ Kal pysov- 
[eévous 6oa av exetvous emuTpeuper. Eixés, epn. 
Xd poev Tolvuv, hv 8 éya, o vopoberns adrots, 
Womep tos avopas e&édeEas, ovrTw Kal Tas 
yuvaikas éexAdEas mapaddces Kal’ doov olov Te 
opogueis: ot 8€ dre olkias Te Kal Evooiria Kowd 
EXOVTES, (dia dé oddevos ovdev TOLOUTOV KEKTPEVOD, 

D 606 57) Eoovrat, opod de dvapepuypreveov Ka ev 
yupvaciots Kal ev TH GAA Tpoph} on’ avaykKns, 
omar, THs éuddtov dfovtar mpos THY aAdAjAwv 
piEw. 7) ovK dvayKotd got Soxd A€yew 5 Ov 
yewpetpicats ye, 7 8 ds, GAN epwrikats avdy- 

% OF, Plassee on Aristoph. Clouds 727. 

> Cf. Herod. ix. 8. He returns to the postponed topic in 
466 p, but again digresses and does not take it up definitely 
till 471 c or rather 473 c-p. The reason is that the third 
wave of paradox is also the condition of the possibility of 
realisation. Cf. Introd. p. xvii. 

¢ Of. supra on 340 a-B. 

4 That is to say, they are to imitate or conform to our 



ness * and desire to postpone? and examine later the 
question of feasibility, but will at present assume 
that, and will, with your permission, inquire how the 
rulers will work out the details in practice, and try 
to show that nothing could be more beneficial to the 
state and its guardians than the effective operation 
of our plan. This is what I would try to consider 
first together with you, and thereafter the other 
topic, if you allow it.” “I do allow it,” he said: 
“proceed with the inquiry.” “TI think, then,” said 
I, “that the rulers, if they are to deserve that name, 
and their helpers likewise, will, the one, be willing 
to accept orders,° and the other, to give them, in some 
things obeying our laws, and imitating? them in 
others which we leave to their discretion.” “‘ Pre- 
sumably.” “You, then, the lawgiver,”’ I said, “ have 
picked these men and similarly will select to give 
over to them women as nearly as possible of the same 
nature.“ And they, having houses and meals in 
common, and no private possessions of that kind, 
will dwell together, and being commingled in gym- 
nastics and in all their life and education, will be 
conducted by innate necessity to sexual union. Is 
not what I say a necessary consequence?” “ Not 
by the necessities of geometry,” he said, “ but by 

rinciples in the details which we leave tothem. So in the 
aaa 770 8, 846 c, 876 ©, and the secondary divinities in 
the Timaeus, 69 c. Cf. Polit. 301 a, and Aristot. Pol. 
1261 b 2 uepetras. 

* Cf. 456 8. Plato has already explained that he means 
‘“‘of like nature in respect to capacity for government.” 
There is no contradiction of the doctrine of the Politicus, 
310 a (cf. Laws 773 a-s) that the mating should blend 
opposite temperaments. Those elements are already mixed 
in the selection of the guardians. Cf. supra 375 B-c, 410 p-e 
and Unity of Plato’s Thought, p. 62, n. 481. 





Kats, at Kwdvvevovow eéxeivwy Spyrtrepar elvar 
mpos TO 7reWWew Te Kal EAKew Tov moAdv Acwv. 
VIII. Kai pada, elrov: adda peta 57) radra, 
> , > 4, ‘ , > ”“ 
& TAavewv, atdktws pev plyvvoba addAjrous 7 
dAdo otioby mrovety odTE Gavov ev eddaipovwyv 7rdAEt 
otr’ edcovaw of apxovtes. Od yap Sixatov, éd7. 
AjjAov 81) ott ydpous TO peta TOoOTO TroLjcopeEV 
iepovds eis Sdvapw 6 Tt pddAcota: elev 8’ ay fepoi of 
wodeApdtato. Ilavtdrace pev odv. ds odv 
57) wdeAywsdtaro. eoovta; Tdde por A€ye, @ 
TAavxcwv: op@® yap cov év TH oikia Kal Kdvas 
Onpevtikods Kal Tov yevvaiwy dpvidwy pddra 
auxvovs: dp’ odv, ® mpos Atds, mpooéaxnkds Tt 
a \ 
tots TovTwy ydpous Te Kal matdomrouas; To 
7 a ~ UJ 
motov; édy. Ilp@rov pev adr&v tovtwr, Kaimep 
ovTwy yevvaiwy, ap ovK eloi TwWes Kal yiyvovTat 
+ 9.3 3 / be a > © / e , 
apiotor; Hioiv. Ildrepov ody €€ admdvrwy dpoiws 
yevvas, 7) mpoOvpet 6 Te pwdAvoTa ex THY apioTwr; 
~ ~ ”“ 
"Ex t&v dpiotwy. Tis’; ek tv vewrdtwv 7 €K 
~ 4 ” > > / bd , 
TOV yepaitdtwy 7) e& axpaldvrwy 6 Tt padoTa; 
"EE dxpaldvrwy. Kai éav pr ottrw yevvarat, 
a a ~ > 4 
TOAY gow Hyet xetpov EceoOar TO Te THV Opvidwv 
~ ~ ” / \ 
Kal TO Tav Kuvdv yévos; “"Eywy’, ébn. Ti be 
o ” oo > > 7 A ~ »” 4 
immwv ole, Hv & eyw, Kal Tov GAwy Cow; F 
” ” ” / > LA > > Lud ” 
adAn mn éexew; “Artomov pevr’ av, 4 5° Gs, ety. 
a /, 
BaBai, jv 3° ey, d pire Eraipe, ws dpa opodpa 

@ The phrase is imitated by Plutarch, d4dv. Col. 1122 p 
uotkais, ob yewuerpikats Exduevos avdyKats. 

> Cf. Laws 789 B-c. 

¢ The riddling question to which the response is ** what?” 
is a mannerism derived from tragedy, which becomes very 



those of love,* which are perhaps keener and more 
potent than the other to persuade and constrain the 

VIII. “They are, indeed,’ I said; “but next, 
Glaucon, disorder and promiscuity in these unions or 
in anything else they do would be an unhallowed thing 
in a happy state and the rulers will not suffer it.” 
“Tt would not be right,” he said. “ Obviously, then, 
we must arrange marriages, sacramental so far as may 
be. And the most sacred marriages would be those 
that were most beneficial.” “‘ By all means.” “ How, 
then, would the greatest benefit result? Tell me 
this, Glaucon. I see that you have in your house 
hunting-dogs and a number of pedigree cocks.?> Have 
you ever considered something about their unions 
and procreations?’’ “What?’’* he said. “In the 
first place,” I said, “among these themselves, 
although they are a select breed, do not some prove 
better than the rest?” “They do.” ‘Do youthen 
breed from all indiscriminately, or are you careful 
to breed from the best#?”’ “ From the best.”” “ And, 
again, do you breed from the youngest or the oldest, 
or, so far as may be, from those in their prime?” 
“ From those in their prime.” “ And if they are not 
thus bred, you expect, do you not, that your birds’ 
breed and hounds will greatly degenerate?” ‘‘I do,” 
he said. ‘‘ And what of horses and other animals?” 
I said ; “is it otherwise with them?” ‘It would be 
strange if it were,” said he. “Gracious,” said I, 
“ dear friend, how imperative, then, is our need of the 
frequent in the later style of the Sophist, Politicus and 

# This commonplace of stirpiculture or eugenics, as it is 

now called, begins with Theognis 184, and has thus far got 
no further. 



Huey det dikpev elvau Tav dpxovrey, ctrrep | kal 
mepl TO TOV avOpdimwv yéevos doavros exet. 
CAAA pev 87 € EXEL, dn: GAAa ti 84; “Ore avdyKn 
avrois, jv & eyes, pappdxous ToMois xpijoGae. 
tatpov S€ mov 441) Seopévors pev capac pappakwr, 
GAXAa Siaitn eBeAdvrenv drraxovew, Kal pavhdrepov 
eapreiv jhyotpea elvauy drav S€ 87) Kal pappa- 
kevew Sén, topev ore dv5perorépov det Tod arped, 
‘Ady Oy: adda mpos Tt Aéyets ; IIpds TOOE, Hv O° 
eye avxv@ TH ever Kad Th dmdry Kuvduvever 
D7 jpiv Serjoew xpjoba. Tods dpxovras en apeneig 
TOV apxopeveny. epapev 5€ mov ev papparov 
cider mdvTa Ta ToLadTa xpnoyra elvac. Kai opbas 
Ye, egy. "Ev tots ydpous Toivuv Kau mratdo7roviats 
€ouke TO dpbov TobTo ylyveoBae otk €AdxvoTov. 
Ilas 515 Ae bev, elrrov, ek TOV chpodoynpevenv 
TOUS dpiorous Tats aplorats ovyylyveobat ws 
TAELoTaKis, Tovs dé paviordrous Tats pavrordrats 
E robvavriov, Kal Trav pev Ta exyova Tpepew, TOV 
dé un, €t peMee TO TrolpvLov 6 Tt akpoTaTov elvan: 
Kal Tabra TavTa. yeyvopeva AavOavew mAhv adrovs 
TOVs GpxYovTas, El av 7 dyeAn tav dvddKwy 6 Tt 
pdAvora doraciactos éora. “Opborara, eon. 
Odxodv 87 € €oprat TLWES vopobernrea [écovrat], ev 
ais Evvdgomev Tas Te vopdas Kal Tovs vuppious, 
Kat Ovoiar Kai Spo mounTeou Tots TpeTepous 
460 mounTats mpemovres Tots yeyvowevous ydyous* TO 
é 7AR00s TOV yapwv emt Tots apyovat ToMaopEV, 

* A recurrence to the metaphor of 389 B, as we are re- 
minded below in p. 
> Cf. 389 B, 414 c, and Laws 663 p én’ ayatG pevderGar. 
Cf. on 343 a-s and Polit. 267 s-c, 268 B. ad below merely 



highest skill in our rulers, if the principle | holds also 
for mankind.” “ Well, it does,” he said, “‘ but what 
of it?” “This,” said I, “that they will have to 
employ many of those drugs® of which we were 
We thought that an inferior physician 
sufficed for bodies that do not need drugs but yield 
to diet and regimen. But when it is necessary to 
prescribe drugs we know that a more enterprising 
and venturesome physician is required.” “ True; 
but what is the pertinency?” “ This,” said I: “it 
seems likely that our rulers will have to make con- 
siderable use of falsehood and deception for the 
benefit ° of their subjects. We said, I believe, that 
the use of that sort of thing was in the category of 
medicine.” “‘ And that was right,” he said. “In 
our marriages, then, and the procreation of children, 
it seems there will be no slight need of this kind of 
“right.” “How so?” “It follows from our 
former admissions,” I said, “that the best men must 
cohabit with the best women in as many cases as 
ible and the worst with the worst in the fewest, 
and that the offspring of the one must be reared and 
that of the other not, if the flock ° is to be as perfect 
as possible. And the way in which all this is brought 
to pass must be unknown to any but the rulers, if, 
again, the herd of guardians is to be as free as possible 
from dissension.” ‘‘ Most true,” he said. ““We 
shall, then, have to ordain certain festivals and sacri- 
fices, in which we shall bring together the brides and 
the bridegrooms, and our poets must compose h 
suitable to the marriages that then take place. But 
the number of the marriages we will leave to the dis- 

marks the second consideration, harmony, the first being 


iv’ ws pddvora Siacwlwor tov adrov apiOuov tov 
avdp@v, mpos moAd€uous te Kal voaous Kal mavTa 
Ta Towadta amockorobytes, Kal pyre peydAn Hpiv 
 woAts Kata TO Suvarov pyTE opLKpa ylyvnTaL. 
"OpOds, edn. KAfpor 54 tives, oluar, mounréor 
Kouipol, wate tov datrov exeivov aitiacba éd’ 
exdoTns auvepEews TUyNnV, GAAG ft) TOUS apxovTas. 
Kai pada, édy. 

B_ IX. Kai tots adyabois yé mov tav véwy ev T0- 
Aduw 7 adAobi mov yépa Sotéov Kai dba adda Te 
Kal adloveotépa % e€ovoia ths TOV yuvaiK@v 
EvyKounoews, va Kal Gua peta mpoddcews ws 
mAcioto. THY Traldwy ex THV TOLOvTWY O7TElpwrTAL. 
’OpOds. Odkodv Kai ta del yuyvopeva Exyova 
TrapaAapBdvovoa ai émi tovtwy edeornKkviar ap- 
xat elite avdp@v cite yuvaukdv etre apddorepa: 
Kowal pev ydp mov Kal apyal yuvaréi te Kal 

C dvipdow. Nai. Ta pev 8) ta&v ayabdv, S0Ka, 
AaBodcat eis TOV oNnkOv oicovat Tapa TLWas Tpodods, 
xXwpis oikovoas ev TW pepet Tis Todews" a d¢€ 
TOV xEelpovwv, Kal edv TL TOV ETépwv avaTNpoVv 
ylyyntar, ev amoppytw te Kal adnAw KaTaKpU- 
yovow ws mpéme. Himep wéAder, edn, Kabapov To 
yevos TOV dvddkwv éceobar. OdKxodv Kal tpodijs 
obra. émipeAjoovTrar, Tas TE pynTtépas éeml Tov 
onkov dyovtes, 6Tav onapy@o., Tacav pnxavyy 

D pnxXardpevor, ws pndeuia TO adTHs aicOnceTat, 

* Plato apparently forgets that this legislation app 

only to the guardians. The statement that ancient civiliza- 

tion was free from the shadow of Malthusianism requires 
qualification by this and many other passages. Of. 372 ¢ 
and Laws 740 p-r. The ancients in fact took it for granted. 



cretion of the rulers, that they may keep the number 
of the citizens as nearly as may be the same,* taking 
into account wars and diseases and all such considera- 
tions, and that, so far as possible, our city may not 
grow too great or too small.” “ Right,’ he said. 
“ Certain ingenious lots, then, I suppose, must be 
devised so that the inferior man at each conjugation 
may blame chance and not the rulers.” “Yes, 
indeed,” he said. 

1X. “Andonthe youngmen, surely, who excelin war 
and other pursuits we must bestow honours and prizes, 
and, in particular, the opportunity of more frequent 
intercourse with the women, which will at the same 
time be a plausible pretext for having them beget as 
many of the children as possible.” “ Right.” “ And 
the children thus born will be taken over by the 
officials appointed for this, men or women or both, 
since, I take it, the official posts too are common to 
women and men. The offspring of the good, I suppose, 
they will take to the pen or créche, to certain nurses 
who live apart in a quarterof the city, but the offspring 
of the inferior, and any of those of the other sort who 
are born defective, they will properly dispose of in 
secret,’ so that no one will know what has become of 
them.” “ That is the condition,” he said, “ of pre- 
serving the purity of the guardians’ breed.” “ They 
will also supervise the nursing of the children, con- 
ducting the mothers to the pen when their breasts 
are full, but employing every device ° to prevent any- 

> Opinions differ whether this is euphemism for exposure. 
On the frequency or infrequency of this practice cf. Professor 
La Rue Van Hook’s article in T.A.P.A. vol. li, and that 
of H. Bolkestein, Class. Phil. vol. xvii. (1922) pp. 222-239. 

© Cf. supra on 414 8 and Aristot. Pol. 1262 a 14 ff. 



Kal das yaha exovoas exmropilovres, eav pt) 
adrat ixaval @ot, Kat abra@v rovtwv émyseAjoorrat, 
Omrws _ HET puov Xpovov OnAdcovran, dypumvias dé 
Kat Tov dAAov Trovov tirBaus Te Kal Tpodots Tapa- 
dwaovow; TloAAny paotwvnv, edn, Adyeus THs 
madoTrovlas rats Ta@v vAdKwv yuvakiv. IIpérree 
yap, nv 8 eya. TO o) eheEfs dueAQwpev 6 mpo- 
Ovpovpeba. edapev yap d7 &€ dcpalovrany div 

E ra exyova yiyvesBar. “Ady Oj. “Ap” obv got fuv- 


doxket [eT plos Xpovos akphs Ta €lKOaL ern, yuvaki, 
avdpt de 7a. TpUaKovTa. 5. Ta mota atrav; én. 
Dvvacki pe, Hv 8 eye, dpEapevy amo €iKooU- 
eTLO0s pexpt TeTTapaKovTaeTiBos TiKTEW TH moheu 
dv8pt b€, emerdav TV oguTarny Spduou aKpnv 
Taph, TO aro TovTov yevvay TH mdoXeu HEXpe TeVvTE- 
KAUTEVTIKOVTAETOUS. "Audotépwr yodr, edn, abrn 
ak) cwpatdos Te Kal ppovijcews. Odxodr é edv Te 
mpeaButepos TovTwy éedv TE vewTepos THY Eis TO 
Kowvov yevrvicewy ayyntat, ote Govov odte Sixatov 
dyjoomev TO audpTnua, ws maida gditvovTos TH 
monet, és, ay AdOn, yervjoerar ovx v70 Buovdy 
ovd 70 edx@v dus, ds ep? éxdorous Tots ydpous 
evéovTar Kal tépevar Kal lepeis Kat Evprraca 7 4 70- 
dis €& dyabay dpeivous Kat €€ wderiuwv open 

B pwrépous det TOUS exyovous yiyveoBat, adn’ da 

okdTov peta Sewis axpateias yeyoves. -Opbas, 

2 Another favourite idea and expression. Cf. Gorg. 459 c, 
Laws 648 c, 713 p, 720 c, 779 is 903 x, Isoc. iv..36, Xen. 

Mem. iii. 13. 5. > Cf. supra on 458 c. 
¢ Half humorous legal language. Cf. Aristot. Pol. 
1335 b 28 derroupyeiv .. . mpds ait ae ec and Lucan’s 

“urbi pater est, urbique maritus” (Phars. ii. 388). The 
dates for marriage are given a little ifferently in the Laws, 


ES ee 


one from recognizing her own infant. And they will 
provide others who have milk if the mothers are in- 
sufficient. But they will take care that the mothers 
themselves shall not suckle too long, and the trouble 
of wakeful nights and similar burdens they will 
devolve upon the nurses, wet and * “You are 
making maternity a soft job? for the women of the 
guardians.”” “It ought to be,” said I, “but let us 
pursue our design. We said that the offspring should 
come from parents in their prime.” “True.” “Do 
you agree that the period of the prime may be fairly 
estimated at twenty years for a woman and thirty 
for aman?” “How do you reckon it?”’® he said. 
“The women,” I said, “ beginning at the age of 
twenty, shall bear for the state‘ to the age of forty, 
and the man shall beget for the state from the time 
he passes his prime in swiftness i in running to the age 
of fifty-five.” “That is,” he said, “the maturity 
and prime for both of body and mind.” “ Then, if 
anyone older or younger than the prescribed age 
meddles with procreation for the state, we shall say 
that his error is an impiety and an injustice, since he 
is begetting for the city a child whose birth, if it 
escapes discovery, will not be_attended by the sacri- 
fices and the prayers which the priests and priest- 
esses and the entire city prefer at the ceremonial 
marriages, that ever better offspring may spring from 
good sires? and from fathers helpful to the state 
sons more helpful still. But this child will be born 
in darkness and conceived in foul incontinence.” 
785 8B, 833 c-p, men 30-35, women 16-20. On the whole 
question and Aristotle’s opinion ¢f. Newman, Introd. to 
Aristot. Pol. p. 183; cf. also Grube, Class. Quarterly 1927, 
pp. 95 ff., “* The Marriage Laws in Plato’s Republic.” 
* Cf. Horace, Odes iv. 4. 29. 
VOL. I 24 465 


ey. ‘O adros b€ y’, elzov, vopos, éav Tus TOV 
ETL yevveavTav tay bovlpbairros dpxovros daryrat 
TOV €v | HAucta yuvarKay- vobov yap Kal avéyyvov 
Kal dviepov dyjoopev adrov matda TH moAeu xab- 
votdvat. "Opborata, épn. “Otay dé 5%, ofuar, at 
Te yuvaikes Kal of avdpes TOD yevvav exBaau THY 
HAckiav, adjaopev tov éAevOdpovs adtovds ovyyi- 
C yrecbar & av eéAwor, tAjv Ovyarpt Kai pytpl Kat 
tais Tav Ovyatépwv mavol Kai Tals dvw pnTpos, 
Kal yuvatkas ad mAnv viel Kal matpt Kal Tots 
TOUTWV Eig TO KATW Kat Eml TO AVW, Kal TadTa y 
75 TavTa _OvaxeAevodevor mpobupetabac, padvora 
pev pnd ets pds exdepew KUnua pase y ev, édy 
yevnrar, eav dé Tu Budonra, ovTw riBévae, as 
ovK ovens Tpopis TO TOUTED. Kai Tabra. pev 
y F édn, jeetpieos Aéyerau: marépas dé kal Ovya- 
D répas Kai & viv 87) _tAeyes TOs Svayvebcovrat 
dAAjAwv; Oddapads, jv 8 eyd, adr ad’ as av 
npLepas TLS abray vupplos yernrar, pet exeivny 
dexdTw pene Kal EBdouq 57) 4 a av yevyra exyova, 
TAUTA TAVTA TPOGEpEl TA [EV dppeva vieis, Ta be 
OnAvea Ovyarépas, Kai éxeiva exeivoy matépa, Kal 
ovTw 87) Td ToUTwY exyova maidcov matoas Kal 
exeiva, av éxetvous mdmmous TE Kal 70s, 7a. S° 
ev exeivep TO Xpovey yeyovoTa, ev @ at pnrépes 
Kal ot marépes avTav éeyévvwy, adeAdds Te Kal 
E ddeAdovs: ‘wore, 6 viv 81 eAdyopev, adAjAwy pH 

dmreabar: adeAdods Sé Kat adeAdas Sacer 6 vouos 

@ Cf. Laws 838 a and 924 £5. 

> Cf. Newman, op. cit. p. 187. 

° Cf. Wundt, Elements of Folk Psychology, p. 89: “A 
native of Hawaii, for example, calls by the name of father 



“Right,” he said. “ And the same rule will apply,” 
I said, “if any of those still within the age of 
procreation goes in to a woman of that age with 
whom the ruler has not paired him. We shall 
say that he is imposing on the state a base-born, 
uncertified, and unhallowed child.” ‘‘ Most rightly,” 
he said. “But when, I take it, the men and the 
women have passed the age of lawful procreation, 
we shall leave the men free to form such relations 
with whomsoever they please, except? daughter and 
mother and their direct descendants and ascendants, 
and likewise the women, save with son and father, 
and so on, first admonishing them preferably not even 
to bring to light ® anything whatever thus conceived, 
but if they are unable to prevent a birth to dispose of it 
on the understanding that we cannot rear such an 
offspring.” “All that sounds reasonable,” he said ; 
“but how are they to distinguish one another's 
fathers and daughters, and the other degrees of kin 
that you have just mentioned?” ‘“ They won't,” 
said I, “ except that a man will call all male offspring 
born in the tenth and in the seventh month after he 
became a bridegroom his sons, and all female, 
daughters, and they will call him father. And, 
similarly, he will call their offspring his grandchildren? 
and they will call his group grandfathers and grand- 
mothers. And all children born in the period in 
which their fathers and mothers were procreating 
will regard one another as brothers and sisters. This 
will suffice for the prohibitions of intercourse of which 
we just now spoke. But the law will allow brothers 

+ + . every man of an age such that he could be his father.” 
Cf. Aristoph. Eccles. 636-637. 
# Cf. 363 pv and Laws 899 £, 927 zB. 





avuvoikely, €av 6 KAfpos tatty Evprintn Kal 7 
/ ~ > / * So. 
Ilvia mpocavarpy. “Opbdtata, 7 8’ ds. 
x ‘H A 8n) Yy > TA 4 Ma 
: pev 87) Kowwvia, ® TAavewv, adryn Te 
‘ v4 ~ ‘ / cal /, / 
Kal TovavTyn yuvaiK@v te Kal maidwy tots puvAaki 
Go. THs TéAEws* ws dé Eopevyn TE TH AAAN TOALTEL 
As s* ws pevn Te TH GAAn ToATELa 
\ ~ / a A \ \ lol 4 
kai paxp® BeAtiorn, det 57) TO peta TobTo BeBarad- 
cacbat mapa Tod Adyou: 7 Tas mowdpev; Odrw 
vy Ata, 4 8 ds. “Ap” obv ody Ade apxy THs 
opmodroyias, epéobar Huds adbrovs, Ti moTEe TO pé- 
yiotrov ayalov éxyowev eizeiv eis moAews KaTa- 
oxeunv, od det otoxaldopuevov Tov vopobérny TiWevat 
Tovs VomoUS, Kal TL “LeytoToV KakOY, €iTa éemioKepa- 
0 > a“ ~ or, 5 AO > A \ ~ 
ofa, dpa & viv 57) SdijAdomev eis pev TO TOD 
ayabod iyvos juiv apudtrer, TH SE TOD KaKod 
> a / / ” ” - 
avappootret; Ildvrwyv pwadvora, py. “Eyomev odv 
Tt wetlov Kakov moAeu 7) exeivo, 6 av adrnv diaora 
Kal moun moAAds avTt pds; 7 petlov ayalov Tod 
6 av €vvdq Te Kal moun pilav; Odx €xopmer. 
Odxodv  pev HOovAs Te Kal AUTNs Kowwvia Evvdel, 
6tav 6 TL pddAvoTa mavTes ot ToAtrar TOY abTa@v 
yiyvonevwy Te Kal amoAAupéevwy TapamAnoiws 
xatpwor kat Avravrar; T[lavtdwact pev obv, edn. 
£ / ~ + idl Ps) Xr /, id ¢ 
H 8 ye trav Towdtwr idimors Svadver, Stay ot 
a a > a 
pev mreptadyets, of S€ mepiyapets yiyvwvras emt Tots 
abdrots mabypacr THs méAcws Te Kal TOV EV TH 
~ A 
mover; Ti & ov; *Ap’ odv ex todd TO ToLdvde 
/ hd \ a Ad > = 5X \ 
ylyverat, Stay pu) da pléyywvrar ev TH ode TA 
TOLWWdE phyata, TO TE Euov Kal TO OK Emov, Kal 


and sisters to cohabit if the lot so falls out and 
the Delphic oracle approves.” ‘“‘ Quite right,” 
said he. 

X. “ This, then, Glaucon, is the manner of the com- 
munity of wives and children among the guardians. 
That it is consistent with the rest of our polity and by 
far the best way is the next point that we must get 
confirmed by the argument. Is not thatso?” “It 
is, indeed,” he said. “Is not the logical first step 
towards such an agreement to ask ourselves what we 
could name as the greatest good for the constitution 
of a state and the proper aim of a lawgiver in his 
legislation, and what would be the greatest evil, and 
then to consider whether the proposals we have just 
set forth fit into the footprints ? of the good and do not 
suit those of the evil? ’’ “ By all means,” he said. 
“ Do we know of any greater evil for a state than the 
thing that distracts it and makes it many instead of 
one, or a greater good than that which binds it to- 

gether and makes it one?” “We do not.” “Is 

not, then, the community of pleasure and pain the tie 
that binds, when, so far as may be, all the citizens 
rejoice and grieve alike at the same births and 
deaths?” “By all means,” he said. “But the 
individualization of these feelings is a dissolvent, 
when some grieve exceedingly and others rejoice at 
the same happenings to the city and its inhabi- 
tants?”’ “Of course.” “And the chief cause of this 
is when the citizens do not uttér in unison such words 
as “ mine ’ and ‘ not mine,’ and similarly with regard 

* We may perhaps infer from the more explicit reference 
in Theaetet. 193 c that Plato is thinking of the “ recognition ” 
by footprints in Aeschyl. Choeph. 205-210. 



mept Tod aAAotpiou Kata tadtd; KopidH peév odv. 
"Ev Fru 87 mdéAe mAcioro. emi to adro Kata 
tavta TodTo A€yovot TO e“ov Kal TO ovK epor. 
oe ” a“ / ‘ id \ 
avtn apiota Sioixetrar; TloAd ye. Kai aris 82) 
eyyUTata evos avOpwrov exet, olov 6tav Tov Hudv 
daxtudds Tov TAnyH, Taca  Kowwvia % KaTa TO 
cGpa mpos HV puxnv TeTapevn eis piav odvrakw 
D rv Tob apxovtos ev atti jobeTo Te Kai Taoa aya 
EvynAynoe jeépovs Tovyicavtos 6An, Kal ovTw 8 
A€yopev ott 6 avOpwros Tov SdKtvdAov aAyet- Kat 
mept aAdov dtovobv Ta&v Tob avOpuimrov 6 avros Ad- 
yos, wept te AvmyNs TovobvTos pépous Kal epi 
ndovas pailovtos. “O atros ydp, €dn, Kal todto 
6 épwrds, Tod TovwovTov éeyytTaTa 7 apioTa TroAL- 
Tevopevn mOAts oiket. ‘Evos 8%, olwat, madoxovros 
Tav TodTav dtiwbv H ayablov 7 KaKdv, 7 ToLadTH 
E woXus padvora te pyoe. eavtis elvat TO madoxor, 
kal 7 €vvynoOjoerar dmaca 7 €vAduTHoETAL. 
’AvayKn, €bn, THY ye evvopov. 
“GC ”“ ” i 8° > 4 > , c a ware 
pa av ein, Hv 8 eyed, emavievar Hiv emt 
Tv Hetépav moAw, Kal ta Tob Adyou dpodoyy- 
para oxo7eiv ev adrh, et adtn padior’ Eexet EtTeE 
« Cf. supra 423 B, Aristot. Pol. 1261 b 16 ff., “ Plato’s 
Laws and the Unity of Plato’s Thought,” Class. Phil. ix. 
(1914) p. 358, Laws 664 a, 739 c-E, Julian (Teubner) ii. 459, 
Teichmiiller, Lit. Fehden, vol. i. p. 19, Mill, Utilitarianism, 
iii. 345: ‘In an improving state of the human mind the 
influences are constantly on the increase which tend to 
generate in each individual a feeling of unity with all the 
rest, which, if perfect, would make him never think of or 
desire any beneficial condition for himself in the benefits 
of which they are not included ;* Spinoza, paraphrased by 
Hoffding, Hist. of Mod. Phil. i. p. 325: “It would be best, 

since they seek a common good, if all could be like one 
mind and one body.” Rabelais I. lvii. parodies Plato: “Si 



tothe word ‘alien’?"* “Precisely so.” “ That city, 
then, is best ordered in which the greatest number 
use the expression ‘mine’ and ‘ not mine’ of the 
same things in the same way.’’ “ Much the best.” 
“ And the city whose state is most like that of an 
individual man.” For example, if the finger of one 
of us is wounded, the entire community of bodily 
connexions stretching to the soul for “integration ’¢ 
with the dominant part is made aware, and all of it 
feels the pain as a whole, though it is a part that 
suffers, and that is how we come to say that the 
man has a pain in his finger. And for any other 
member of the man the same statement holds, alike 
for a part that labours in pain or is eased by pleasure.” 
“The same, ’ he said, “‘ and, to returnto your question, 
the best governed state most nearly resembles such 
an organism.” “‘ That is the kind of a state, then, 
I presume, that, when anyone of the citizens suffers 
aught of good or evil, will be most likely to speak of 
the part that suffers as its own and will share the 
pleasure or the pain as a whole.” “ Inevitably,” he 
said, “‘ if it is well governed.” 

XI. “Itis time,” I said, “* to return to our city and 
observe whether it, rather than any other, embodies 

quelqu’un ou quelqu’une disoit ‘beuvons,’ tous beuvoient” 
etc. Aristotle’s criticism, though using some of Plato’s 
phrases, does not mention his name at this point but speaks 
of tives, Pol. 1261 b 7. 

> Cf. Laws 829 a. ‘ 

* I so translate to bring out the analogy between Plato 
and ¢.g. Sherrington. For “to the soul” cf. Unity of 
Plato’s Thought, n. 328, Laws 673 a, Tim. 45 pv, infra 584 c, 
Phileb. 33, 34, 43 8-c. Poschenrieder, Die Platonischen 
Dialoge in ihrem Verhiltnisse zu den Hippocratischen 
Schriften, p. 67, compares the De locis in homine, vi. p. 278 




Kat adAn tis waAAov. Odxotv xp, edn. Ti odv; 
€oTt pév Tov Kal ev Tats aAAats moAcow apyovrés 
te kal Shpos, €or S€ Kal ev adrH; “Eorw. 
TloXitas prev 87 mavres odrot aAAjAovs mpoc- 
epodow ; Ilds & ov; "AMG mpos T® troXitas Ti 
) €v Tats dAAaus Ofjwos Tovs apxovTas mpocayo- 
pever; °Ev pev tats oats Seomoras, € ev d€ Tals 
SnpmoKkpaToupevats avdTo Tovvoy.a ToOTO, apyovTas. 
Ti & 6 & TH Hperépa Shuos; mpos TO moAitas 
ti tovs dpxovras dynow clvar; Lwrhpds Te Kat 
emuxovpous, efn. Ti 8 obra tov Shuov; Mucbo- 
ddtas te Kal tpodéas. Oi 8 ev tats adAas 
dpxovtes tods Syuovs; AovdAovs, ébn. Ti 8 ot 
apxovtes aAAjAovs; Huvdpxovtas, edn. Ti 8’ oi 
netepor; EvyudtdAaxas. “Exes obv eimety tev 
apxyovtwy Tav ev tats dAAas moAcow, el Tis TiVa 
éyeu mpocemeiv tav EvvapyovTwy Tov pev ws 
oixetov, Tov 8 ws adAdAdtpiov; Kai moAdovs ye. 
Odxoby Tov pev oikeiov ws éavTod vomiler Te Kal 

C Xéyer, Tov 8 aAAdTpiov ws ody EavTod; OdTws. 

/ A ¢ A \ 4 ” bl A > ~ 
Ti 5€ of mapa aot dvAakes; €o8” dotis adTav 
éxou av TOv EvudvAdxwv vopioa Twa 7 mpoceumeiv 
€ > , > A ” \ 7 eon 
ws aAAdrprov ; Ovdapas, eb: mavTt yap, @ av 
evTvyxavy Ts, 7 as ASD H ws adeAbH 7) ws 
marpt 7 os pnrpl  vtet 7) Ovyarpt 2 ToUTwY 
Exyovous 7 mpoyovors vopet evTvyxavew. Kaa- 
Avara., HV e ey, A€yeus: aA’ €Tt Kal TOOE Elze: 
motepov adtots Ta dvou“ara povov oiketa vopobern- 
ces, 7) Kal Tas mpdéeis mdoas KaTa Ta OVvoMaTa 

@ For these further confirmations of an established thesis 
ef. on 442-443. 



the qualities agreed upon in our argument.2” “We 
must,” he said. ‘“‘ Well, then, there are to be found 
in other cities rulers and the people as in it, are there 
not?” “There are.” “‘ Will not all these address 
one another as fellow-citizens?’’ “Of course.” 
“ But in addition to citizens, what does the people 
in other states call its rulers?” “In most cities, 
masters, in democratic cities, just this—rulers.” 
“ But what of the people in our city. In addition to 
citizens, what do they call their rulers?” “ Saviours 
and helpers,” he said. “ And what term do these 
apply to the people ?”’’ “ Payers of their wage and 
supporters.” “And how do the rulers in other 
states denominate the populace?” “Slaves,” he 
said. “And how do the rulers describe one 
another?” ‘“‘Co-rulers,” he said. ‘‘ And ours?” 
“Co-guardians.”” “Can you tell me whether any of 
the rulers in other states would speak of some of their 
co-rulers as ‘ belonging’ and others as outsiders?” 
“Yes, many would.” “ And such a one thinks and 
speaks of the one that ‘ belongs ’ as his own, doesn’t 
he, and of the outsider as not his own?” “ That is 
so.” “ But what of your guardians. Could any of 
them think or speak of his co-guardian as an out- 
sider?” “ By no means,” he said; “ for no matter 
whom he meets, he will feel that he is meeting a 
brother, a sister, a father, a mother, a son, a daughter, 
or the offspring or forebears of these.” “ Excellent,”’ 
said 1; “‘ but tell me this farther, will it be merely 
the names °® of this kinship that you have prescribed 
for them or musi all their actions conform to the 

> r& dvouara wovoyv may be thought to anticipate Aristotle’s 



mparrew, mept TE Tovs Tmarépas, 600 vopos: mept 
matépas aidods TE Tmépt Kat Kndepovias Kal Tob 
darn Koov deiy elvar TOV yovewy, 2 PATE pos Decay 
pare mpos av Opasrrenv avT@ aewvov evecbar, ws 
ovre dove. ouTE Sixava mparrovros av, et dda 
mparrou ) Tadra; obra oot 7 addrAau Phpat ef 
amavrwy TOV Tohuraiv dprjcovew edOds Tepe TO. 
TOV Traidwv ara kal arept TaTépwv, os av adtots 
E 7s amodijvn, Kai mept Tov aGdAwv Evyyevav; Ad- 
Ta, én: yeAoiov yap av etn, él dvev Epywv oiKeta 
ovopata dia TV oTopatwv povov p0eyyowro, 
Ilacdv apa moAewv padre ev avri Evppaovy}- 
govow €vos Twos 4 ed 7 Kans mparrovTos, é vov 
57) edéyopev TO pia, TO OTL TO eov ed mparrer 
Ott TO €jov Kakds. ’Adnbéorara, bs & os. 
464 Odxodv peta TovTov Tob Sdyparos Te Kal pijaros 
edapev Evvarolovbeiv tds Te dovas Kal Tas 
Aimas Kowh; Kai dp0&s ye edapev. Odxodv 
pdAvota Tob abtod Kowwvyicovow Huiv ot moAXrat, 
6 8) éeuov dvopdoovat: tovtov dS€ Kowwvodvtes 
ottw 8 Avmns TE Kai Adovis padvoTa KoWwwviay 
efovow; IloAd ye 7Ap’ obv TovTwy airta. m™pos 
Th adAy KaTAOTAGEL 7) TOV yovaiKay TE Kal Taidwy 
Kowwvia Tots pirat ; TloAd pLev od pddvora, edn. 

B XII. ’AAAa pry péyrorov ye Troe avro cpo- 
Aoyijoapev dyabov, dmeucdlovres ed olxouperny 
moAwW owpatt mpos péepos adTod AUans TE mépt Kal 

Hdovas ws exe. Kat dp0ds y’, &fn, dpodroyy- 

2 Cf. 554 D bre obK Gpewor. 

» Cf. the reliance on a unanimous public opinion in the 
Laws, 838 c-p. 

’ rep . . . wepl: for the preposition repeated in a different 



names in all customary observance toward fathers 
and in awe and care and obedience for parents, if 
they look for the favour ? of either gods or men, since 
any other behaviour would be neithér just nor pious? 
Shall these be the unanimous oracular voices that 
they hear from all the people, or shall some other kind 
of teaching beset ’ the ears of your children from their 
birth, both concerning © what is due to those who are 
pointed out as their fathers and to their other kin?” 
“These,” he said; “ for it would be absurd for them 
merely to pronounce with their lips the names of 
kinship without the deeds.” ‘‘ Then, in this city 
more than in any other, when one citizen fares well 
or ill, men will pronounce in unison the word of which 
we spoke: ‘It is mine that does well; it is mine 
that does ill.’”’ “‘ That is most true,” he said. “ And 
did we not say that this conviction and way of speech? 
brings with it a community in pleasures and pains?” 
“ And rightly, too.” “Then these citizens, above 
all others, will have one and the same thing in com- 
mon which they will name mine, and by virtue of this 
communion they will have their pleasures and pains 
in common.” “ Quite so.” ‘‘ And is not the cause 
of this, besides the general constitution of the state, 
the community of wives and children among the 
guardians?” “ It will certainly be the chief cause,” 
he said. 

XII. “ But we further agreed that this unity is 
the greatest blessing for a state, and we compared a 
well governed state to the human body in its relation 
to the pleasure and pain of its parts.” “And we 

sense cf. Isoc. iv. 34, ix. 3, and Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, 
ut. i. ** As here by Caesar and by you cut off.” 
4 Séyuarés Te Kal pyuaros: cf. Sophist 265 c, Laws 797 c. 



cauev. Tod peyiorov dpa ayalot rh moXe airia 
prev. pey pa ayabod ri 
ot; ~ , ¢€ , ~ > 4 
Hiv wépavTar 7 Kowwvia Tots emiKovpois THY TE 
A \ ~ ~ A #\> ” ‘\ 
maliswy Kat TOY yuvaikdv. Kat pad’, edn. Kat 
fev 52) Kal Tots mpdcbev ye ouodroyotpev: epapev 
yap mov, ovTe oikias TovTows idias Seiv elvae ove 
C yfv ovre Te KTHpa, GAAA Tapa THv GAAwY tpodiy 
AapPdvovras, pucbov tis puAakis, Kowh mavras 
> , > / * , 
avaXioxew, e«f pedAdovev dvtTws dtAakes elvar. 
’Op0Gs, edn. “Ap” odv ody, Grep A€yw, Ta TE 
‘ > / ‘ A ~ r , ” ~ 
mpdoabev cipnueva Kat Ta vov Aeydopeva Ett wGAAov 
> / > A > \ / A a 
amepyaletar adtovs aAnfiwodrs dvAakas, Kat Trovet 
py Swaomav thy moAw, TO euov dvoudlovras fun 
\ > ‘ > > »” 4 A \ > y e ~ 
70 avTo aAd’ adAdAov dAdo, Tov pev «eis THY EavTOO 
> /, Ld a an“ 4 ‘ ~ + 
oikiav €AkovtTa, 6 Te av SUvynTar xwpis TOV adAwv 
D xrjoacba, Tov dé eis THv éavTod érépay ovoar, 
Kal yuvatkd Te Kal matdas éTépous, HOovds TE Kal 
> 6 > ~ 7 + 927 > > 
aAynddvas eumovbtvtas idiwvy ovtwy idias, add 
évi Soypatt Tod oikelov mépe emt TO adto Tel- 
vovtas mavtTas eis TO SuvaTrov Gpotrabeis AvaHs TE 
Kal ndovas elvar; Kodi pev obv, fn. Ti dai; 
Sixat Te Kal eyKAjpata mpds adAjAovs odK oiy7- 
> > ~ ¢ »” > ~ \ A A ” 
cerat €€ abT@v, ws eros eimeiv, Sia TO pndev Ldvov 
> ~ \ A ~ A > a” 4 ia 
éxtno0a mAnV TO Hua, TA 8’ GAXa Kowd; dOev 
E 81) badpyer tovTows doracidotos elvat, doa ye 
dua xpnudtrav 7 maidwv Kat Evyyev@v KThow 
A > ” 
avOpwro. oracidlovow; I[lodAAj avdyKn, €dn, 

@ Of, 416-417. 
> For asimilar listcf. Laws 842. Aristotle, Pol. 1263b20f., 


were right inso agreeing.” “‘ Then it is the greatest 
blessing for a state of which the community of women 
and children among the helpers has been shown to 
be the cause.” “ Quite so,” he said. “‘ And this is 
consistent with what we said before. For we said,? 
I believe, that these helpers must not possess houses 
of their own or land or any other property, but that 
they should receive from the other citizens for their 
support the wage of their guardianship and all spend 
itincommon. That was the condition of their being 
true guardians.” “ Right,” hesaid. “‘Isit not true, 
then, as I am trying to say, that those former and 
these present prescriptions tend to make them still 
more truly guardians and prevent them from dis- 
tracting the city by referring “ mine ’ not to the same 
but to different things, one man dragging off to his 
own house anything he is able to acquire apart from 
the rest, and another doing the same to his own 
separate house, and having women and children 
apart, thus introducing into the state the pleasures 
and pains of individuals? They should all rather, 
we said, share one conviction about their own, 
tend to one goal, and so far as practicable have one 
experience of pleasure and pain.”” “ By all means,” 
he said. “Then will not law-suits and accusations 
against one another vanish,” one may say,° from among 
them, because they have nothing in private possession 
but their bodies, but all else in common? So that 
we can count on their being free from the dissensions 
that arise among men from the possession of property, 
children, and kin.” “They will necessarily be quit 

objects that it is not lack of unity but wickedness that 
causes these evils. 
* Softens the strong word oiyjcerat. 




amnAddx bar. Kai perv ovde Bratev ye ovo” airias 
Sika Sixaiws av elev ev avrots. Akt pev yap 
TPucas dpvveobat KaXov Kai dikaidv tov pjooper, 
avayKny owpdrov emyreheta reves. ’0p8 Jas, 
ébn. Kai yap T00€ opbov exe, va s eyes, obdros 
6 vopos: et mov vis Tw Oupotro, ev TO Toure) 
mAnpa@v tov Oupov 7 HTTov em peilous a av tow ord.- 
gels. Tlave fev ovv. ITpeoBurepep pv vewTépwv 
TAVTWY dpe Te Kal KoAdlew mpooreTagerar. 
Ajrov. Kat pay ore ye VEWTEPOS mpeaBurepov, 
av 41) dpxovres mpoordrTwow, ouTe o Pid- 
Ceobat emiyeupjoer Tote ovTE TUTTEW, Ws TO EliKOS* 
oluat 8 oddé dAAws atipdoe tkav® yap Tad 

B dvAake Kwdvovte, Séos Te Kal aidws, aidws pev 

Ws yovéwy pr) admrecbat cipyovoa, d€os 5é TO TH 
maaxovTt Tovs adAXous Bonbetv, rods pev wes viels, 
\ A € > 7, A A ¢ /, = 
Tovs de as ddehpous, tovs d€ Ws marépas. Sup- 
Baiver yap ovTws, €dy. Hlavrayf 57) ek TeV 
VOLO eipyvyv mpos d.AArAous ot avdpes afovow ; 
TloAAjv ye. Todrwrv pry ev éavtots pq) oTaca- 
, b \ A , ¢€ av / ) 
Eévrew ovdev Sewov uy mote 7 GAAn mdAus mpos 
Tovrous 2) 7pos adAnjAous SixootarHon Od yap 

Cotv. Ta YE pay opuKporara TOV KAK@V bu’ 

dmpémevav oxva Kai Aéyew, av danMaypevor a av 
elev, KoAakelas te mAovoiwy mévntes' amopias TE 

1 The text is probably corrupt. The genitive, singular or 
plural, is an easy emendation. But the harsh construction 
of révnres as subject of tcxoucr yields the sense required. 

@ Cf. A.J.P. vol. xiii. p. 364, Aeschines iii. 255, Xen. Rep. 
Lac. 4. 5, Laws 880 a. 
*» One of the profoundest of Plato’s many political 



of these,” he said. “ And again, there could not 
rightly arise among them any law-suit for assault 
or bodily injury. For as between age-fellows* we 
shall say that self-defence is honourable and just, 
thereby compelling them to keep their bodies 
in condition.” “Right,” he said. ‘‘ And there 
will be the further advantage in such a law that 
an angry man, satisfying his anger in such wise, 
would be less likely to carry the quarrel to further 
extremes.” “ Assuredly.” “‘ As for an older man, 
he will always have the charge of ruling and 
chastising the younger.” “Obviously.” “ Again, 
it is plain that the young man, except by command 
of the rulers, will probably not do violence to an 
elder or strike him, or, I take it, dishonour him in any 
other way. There being the two competent guardians 
to prevent that, fear and awe, awe restraining him 
from laying hands on one who may be his parent, 
and fear in that the others will rush to the aid of the 
sufferer, some as sons, some as brothers, some as 
fathers.” “* That is the way it works out,” he said. 
“Then in all cases the laws will leave these men to 
dwell in peace together.” “Great peace.” “ And 
if these are free from dissensions among themselves, 
there is no fear that ® the rest of the city will ever 
start faction against them or with one another.” 
“No, there is not.” “But I hesitate, so unseemly ° 
are they, even to mention, the pettiest troubles of 
which they would be rid, the flatterings ¢ of the rich, 
the embarrassments and pains of the poor in the 

aphorisms. Cf. on 545 pv, Laws 683 5, and Aristot. Pol, 
1305 a 39. 

© Alma sdegnosa. Cf. 371 £, 396 B, 397 D, 525 D. 

@ Cf. Aristot. Pol. 1263 b 22. 




kal dAynddvas, doas ev maidotpodia Kal ypnya- 
Ticpots dua tpodiyv oiker@v davayKaiav toxovot, 
Ta pev SaverCouevor, Ta 5€ e€apvodpevor, Ta SE 
mavros TopiadsLevo Oێwevor Tapa, yovairds Te Kal 
oixéras, Tapevew Tapaddovres, doa TE, @ pire, 
mepl abr, Kau ofa mdoxovot, SHAd te dy Kal 
ayevvh Kal ovK dfva Adyew. 

XIII. AjAa yap, edn, kat rudd. Ildvrwv Te 
57) ToUTwY dmadrdfovrat, {ycovet te Tob parka 
piotod Biov, dv ot oAvpmoviKa Cao, paKapue - 
TEpov. Il; Ava o}LuKpov Tov ,HEpos eddarpove- 
Covrat exetvou av TovTous dmrdpxet. n TE yap 
TOvdE vikn Kadri, 7 7 T ex Tod Sypoaiov Tpopy 
TeAewTépa. vieny Te yap vKdou évpmdons Tis 
moAews owrnpiav, Tpodh Te Kal Tots aAAois TaowW, 
dow Bios detrat, avrot TE kal matides avadodvTat, 

E kat yépa déyovTat Tapa THs abT@v mdAews bavrés 


Te Kal TeAevTHCavTes Tadis dEtas peTexovow. 
Kai para, éon, Kadd. Meépvyoau obv, Hv O° eyo, 
oT ev Tots mpoobev ovK ola érov Adyos Hiv 
emémAngev, OTL TOUS pihaxas ovK _eddatpovas 
mowodpev, ois efov TavTa. exew TO. Tav mohur@v 
oddev € EXOLEV; Typets d€ ov Elmopev, OTL TOOTO MEV, 
el ov mapaminto., eioadlis oxepopeda, vov de 
Tovs pev pvdaxas dvAakas Trovobpev, TH be mow 
ws ofol 7° eluev eddapoveotarnv, adr od« eis Ev 

2 Cf. 416 p, 548 a, 550 pv. 

> Proverbial. Cf. Sophist 241 v. 

¢ Cf. 540 B-c, 621 D, Laws 715, 807 c, 840 a, 946-947, 964.c, 
Cic. Pro Flacco 31 ‘ ‘Olympionicen esse apud Graecos pro 
maius et gloriosius est quam Romae triumphasse.” The 
motive is anticipated or parodied by Dracontion, Athenaeus 
237 p, where the parasite boasts— 



bringing-up of their children and the procuring of 
money for the necessities of life for their households, 
the borrowings, the repudiations, all the devices with 
which they acquire what they deposit with wives 
and servitors to husband,’ and all the indignities that 
they endure in such matters, which are obvious and 
ignoble and not deserving of mention.” ‘“ Even a 
blind ® man can see these,” he said. 

XUI. “ From all these, then, they will be finally 
free, and they will live a happier life than that men 
count most happy, the life of the victors at Olympia.°”’ 
“How so?” “The things for which those are 
felicitated are a small part of what is secured for 
these. Their victory is fairer and their public sup- 
port more complete. For the prize of victory that 
they win is the salvation of the entire state, the fillet 
that binds their brows is the public support of them- 
selves and their children—they receive honour from 
the city while they live and when they die a worthy 
burial.” “* A fair guerdon, indeed,” he said. ‘* Do 
you recall,” said I, “ that in the preceding 4 argument 
the objection of somebody or other rebuked us for 
not making our guardians happy, since, though it 
was in their power to have everything of the citizens, 
they had nothing, and we, I believe, replied that this 
was a consideration to which we would return if 
occasion offered, but that at present we were making 
our guardians guardians and the city as a whole as 
happy as possible, and that we were not modelling ¢ 

yépa yap abrots ravra Tots Tahipma 
vix@or dédorar xpnotdryros oiveka. 

4 Cf. 419 £-20. 

* Cf. 420 c. Omitting 16, translate “‘that we were not 
fixing our eyes on any one class, and portraying that as 

VOL. I 21 481 


€8vos amoBdérovres ev avri TobTO [ro] eVSauyiov 
mAdrrouser ; Meprnpae, epy. Tt odv; viv ipiv 
6 T@v émikotpwr Bios, etrrep 708 YE TOV dhupimti0 ~ 
VuK@V odd Te KaAXiwv Kal  dyuetveoy patveTar, pa 
Bay Kata Tov Tov OKUTOTOMUY paiverat Biov 7 
tTiwv daAdAwy Snpvoupy@v 7 Tov Tav yEewpyav 
Ov por doxe?, éy. "AMa. pevrot, 6 ye Kal exel 
éheyor, Siavov Kal evrad0a «cimeiv, Ott, €t odrws 
6 pvdAak emyeipyjoe eddaiwev yiyveoBar, ware 
pnde porak elvat, pnd” dpKécer avT@ Bios ovTw 
péTptos at BéBasos Kal ws nets paper a apioros, 
aAd’ avonros Te Kal petpauadns d0€a é eprecodoa 
evdayovias mépt Opunoer adtov dia Sdvapuy emi 
C To amavra Ta ev Th mroXet oixevoboba, yvacerat 
Tov “Hotodoy 6 OTe TO ovr a cogos Aéywv adéov 
elvai mws Tptov TavTos. “Epot pev, edn, Evp- 
Bovhy Xpopevos pevet em TOUTW TO Bicep. Xvy- 
xwpeis apa, jv & eyes, THY TOV yuvak@v Koww- 
viav Tots avdpdow, nv dieAndAvOayev maideias Te 
mépt Kal maidwv Kal dudakhs Tav aAAwv roAuTar, 
Kata Te moAw pevovoas els 770Acov Te iovoas Kad 
Evppuddrrew deiv Kad EvvOnpevew womTrep Kuvas 
D kal mavra mdvTy Kara TO Suvarov Kowovely, Kal 
TattTa mpattovoas ta Te BéATioTAa mpakew Kat od 
Tapa plow Thv Tod OyXeos mpos TO appev, } medu- 
KaToV 7pos aire Kowuvely ; Lvyxwpd, €dn. 
XIV. Odxodv, jv 8 eyd, éexeivo dowrov &- 
eddobar, ef dpa Kai ev avOpwros duvarov dorep 

2 érixotpwy : the word here includes the rulers. 

> xard, “‘comparable to, on a level with.” Cf. Apol. 
17 8, Gorg. 512 B. © undé: cf. 420 v. 

4 Works and Days 40. So Laws 690 kz. 



our ideal of happiness with reference to any one 
class?” ‘‘I do remember,” he said. ‘‘ Well then, 
since now the life of our helpers * has been shown to 
be far fairer and better than that of the victors at 
Olympia,need we compare ® it with the life of cobblers 
and other craftsmen and farmers?” “I think not,” 
he said. “ But further, we may fairly repeat what 
I was saying then also, that if the guardian shall 
strive for a kind of happiness that will unmake ° him 
as a guardian and shall not be content with the way of 
life that is so moderate and secure and, as we affirm, 
the best, but if some senseless and childish opinion 
about happiness shall beset him and impel him to use 
his power to appropriate everything in the city for 
himself, then he will find out that Hesiod ? was indeed 
wise, who said that the half was in some sort more 
than the whole.” “If he accepts my counsel,” he 
said, “he will abide in this way of life.” “ You 
accept, then, as we have described it, this partner- 
ship of the women with our men in the matter of 
education and children and the guardianship of the 
other citizens, and you admit that both within the 
city and when they go forth to war they ought to 
keep guard together and hunt together as it were 
like hounds, and have all things in every way, so far ~ 
as possible, in common, and that so doing they will 
do what is for the best and nothing that is contrary 
to female human nature ° in comparison with male or 
to their natural fellowship with one another.” “I 
do admit it,”’ he said. 

XIV. “Then,” I said, “‘ is not the thing that it re- 
mains to determine this, whether, namely, it is possible 

* tiv: this order is frequent and sometimes significant in 
the Laws. Cf. 690 c, 720 &, $14 £, 853 a, 857 p, 923 B. 



> ” 7 4 ‘ , > / 

ev ddAows Cwois TavTHY THY KoLWWviav éyyevécbaL, 
Vive / ” wv > A mv 

Kat on Suvarov; Eg6ns,_ eon, etry a epeAAov 
broAnpeoOac. Ilept pev yap Tav ev TH TroAduw 
E olwat, edny, d7jAov ov Tpdmrov moNepifoovew. Ids; 
8 ds. “Ore Kow7, oTparevoovrat, kal mpos ye 
afovat TOV maideov eis Tov mdAeuov Soot ddpol, 
iv? womep of Tay dAAwy Syptovpyav Oedvrac 
Tabra, a TeAcwlévtas Senjoe Snpvoupyety: mpos 
467 be Th Yea Suaxovety Kal UmnpeTety mavTa TA Tept 
TOV méAepov, Kal Oepamevew matépas TE Kal 
pnrépas. 7 ovK joOjoat TO. mepl Tas Téxvas, olov 
Tos TOV KEpapewv maidas, ws moddv xpovov 
SuakovobdvTes Oewpotor mp dmtrecba tod Kepa- 
, ‘ , > > > id > / 
pevew; Kat pada. *H odv €xetvors emipede- 
oTepov maidevtéov 4% Tois dvAakt todvs adrav 
eumeipia te Kal Oa Tov TpOonKOVTOY ; Karayé- 
Aacrov pévr’ av, dn, €in. “AMa pen Kal p paxetrat 
B YE mav Caov dvadepovtTws mapovre @v av TéKy. 
"Eotw otTw* Kivduvos dé, & LaKpares, ou opuKpos 
ofareiow, ofa 81) ev Troha pirci, mpos €avTots 
matdas amoAécavtas Touoa Kal TV aMAny Tow 

advvatov avadaBeiv. "AAnOA, jv S eyw, A€yets: 

@ Cf. on 451 p. The community in this case, of course, 

refers only to occupations. 
> uev yap: forced transition to a delaying digression. 

¢ So with modifications Laws 785 B, 794 c-p, 804 pD-5, 
806 a-B, 813-814, 829 E. 

4 For this practice of Greek artists see Klein, Prawiteles, 
Newman, Introd. to Aristot. Pol. p. 352, Pater, The Renaiss- 
ance 104, Protag. 328 a, Laws 643 s-c, Protagoras frag. 3 
(Diels), Aristot. Pol. 1336 b 36, Iambl. Protrept. 23 
Polyb. vi. 2. 16, iii, 71. 6 Kai masdoa08 mepl Td ToEmKds 
Aristides x. 72 who quotes Plato; Antidotus, Athenaeus, 



for such a community to be brought about among 
men as it is in the other animals, and in what way it 
is possible?’’ ‘‘ You have anticipated,” he said, 
“ the point I was about to raise.” “ For? as for their 
wars, ’ I said, “ the manner in which they will conduct 
them is too obvious for discussion.”” ‘“‘ How so,” said 
he. “Itis obvious that they will march out together,° 
and, what is more, will conduct their children to war 
when they are sturdy, in order that, like the children 
of other craftsmen,’ they may observe the processes 
of which they must be masters in their maturity ; 
and in addition to looking on they must assist and 
minister in all the business of war and serve their 
fathers and mothers. Or have you never noticed 
the practice in the arts, how for example the sons of 
potters look on as helpers a long time before they 
put their hands to the clay?” “ They do,” indeed. 
“Should these then be more concerned than our 
guardians to train the children by observation and 
experience of what is to be their proper business ? ” 
“ That would be ridiculous,” he said. ‘‘ But, further, 
when it comes to fighting, every creature will do 
better in the presence of its offspring? ”’ ‘‘ That is 
so, but the risk, Socrates, is not slight, in the event 
of disasters such as may happen in war, that, losing 
their children as well as themselves, they make it 
impossible for the remnant of the state to recover.” 
“What you say is true,” [ replied; “ but, in the 

240 8, where the parasite boasts that he was a ra:doua@zs in 
his art, and Sosipater, Athenaeus 377 Fr, where the cook 
makes the same boast, Phocyl. frag. 13 (Edmonds, Elegy 
and lambus 1., L.C.L.), Henry Arthur Jones, Patriotism 
and ey dew! Education, Kipling, From Sea to Sea, p, 361. 
Greek language and satire contrasted such wa:dopaGeis vith 
the dypaleis or late learners, 



arAAa od mpArov pev Hyet Tapackevacréov TO pH 
OTE kuduveboat ; Ovdapds. Tis’; & mov Kwdv- 
veuTéov, ovK ev @ Bedrious é Eoovrae “karopOodvres: 
Afrov 8%. *AMA opuKpov olet _Suagpepew Kal ovdK 
aێ.ov Kuddvov, Oewpetv 7) 7) TA mepl TOV moAEpov 
matdas Tovs diBpas TroNepuuKovs EoopLevous 5. Ouk, 
ddd, Suadeper mpos 0 XAéyes. Totdto pev dpa 
drapKTéov, Dewpods Tron€epov Tovs maidas Toei, 
mpoopnxavaabau 8 adrtots dopdrevav, Kal Kadds 
efeu" v) yap. Nad. Ovxodv, hv & eyes, T™p@Tov 
pev abTa@v ot matépes doa avbpwrot ovK dwabets 
eoovrat aAAd yvwpoviKol TOY oTpaTeL@v, doa TE 
Kal py emucivduvor; Eixés, é¢n. Eis pev apa 
Tas dfovew, eis de Tas <dAaBjoovra. ’Opbds. 
Kai 4, dpxovrds ye Tov, hv & eyed, od Tous paviord- 
Tous avrots _€muaTjcovaww, aAXG. Tovs eurrerpia TE 
Kal 7Atkia &. ixavovds tyyepovas TE kad Tadayaryoos 
elvan. Ilpéwe: ydp. "“AdAa yap, djoopev, Kat 
mapa dd€av todd troAAois 81) éyévero. Kat pada. 
IIpos roivuy ta rowatra, @ dire, mTEpobv yxpH 
madia ovta ev0Us, iv’ av tt Sén meTOpevot azo- 
pevywow. Ilds Adyeus; edn. *Emt Tovs inmous, 
Hv 8 eye, avaBiBaoréov ws vewTaTous, Kat 
ddatapevous & inmevew ef immwy axtéov emt Tip 
Oéav, pr) Oupoedav pode paxnTiKdy, an’ O Tt 
TOOWKEGTATWY Kal eUqviwTatov. ovTw yap KaA- 
AuoTd Te Yedoovtar TO abra&v epyov, Kat aopade- 

® rpocunxavacbar: cf. supra on 414 B. 

> rapa ddéav: ef. Thucyd. i. 122 Axicra 6 rodewos ert pyrots 
xwpet, ii. 11, iii. 30, iv. 102, vii. 61. 

¢ wrepody: metaphorical. In Aristoph, Firds 1436-1438 


— a 


first place, is it your idea that the one thing for which 
we must provide is the avoidance of all danger?” 
“By no means.” ‘“‘ And, if they must incur danger, 
should it not be for something in which success will 
make them better?” “Clearly.” ‘‘ Do you think 
it makes a slight difference and not worth some risk 
whether men who are to be warriors do or do not 
observe war as boys?” “No, it makes a great 
difference for the purpose of which -you speak.” 
“* Starting, then, from this assumption that we are to 
make the boys spectators of war, we must further 
contrive security for them and all will be well, will 
it not?” “Yes.” ‘ To begin with, then,” said I, 
*“‘ will not the fathers be, humanly speaking, not 
ignorant of war and shrewd judges of which cam- 

paigns are hazardous and which not?’’ “ Presum- 
ably,” he said. “ They will take the boys with them 
to the one and avoid the others?”’ “ Rightly.” 

“ And for officers, I presume,” said I, “ they will put 
in charge of them not those who are good for nothing 
else but men who by age and experience are qualified 
to serve at once as leaders and as caretakers of 
children.” ‘“‘ Yes, that would be the proper way.” 
“Still, we may object, it is the unexpected? that 
happens to many in many cases.” “ Yes, indeed.” 
“To provide against such chances, then, we must 
wing ¢ the children from the start so that if need arises 
they may fly away and escape.” “What do you 
mean?” he said. ‘‘ We must mount them when very 
young,” said I, “ and first have them taught to ride, 
and then conduct them to the scene of war, not on 
mettlesome war-steeds, but on the swiftest and 
gentlest horses possible ; for thus they will have the 
best view of their own future business and also, if 



orata, av Tt Sén, awOjoovrar pera mpeaBuTépwv 
¢ ~ a 
nyenoveav émduevort. "Opbds, &dn, por Soxeis 
x / Ti 8 A 8 tA L A ‘ ‘ 5X. 
468 Aeyew. Li dat On, elmov, Ta mept Tov moAEMoV; 
m@s €KTEov Go. TOs oTpaTWTas mpos adTovs TE 
‘ nn 
Kat Tovs ToAeuiovs; dp dpO@s wor Katapaiverat 
bal ” A nn 
mn ov; Ady’, &dbn, mot av. Adrdv per, etzov, 
A A , 7 x“ @ r > ‘aAd ” ~ 
tov Aurovta tafw 7 Oda dnoBaddvta 4 Te TOV 
ToLOvTwWY ToLjcavTa Sia KaKnY apa od SnuLvoupyov 
twa Set Kabiordvas 7 yewpyov; Tlavy peév obdv. 
To de ~ > \ rv / aAo > ee 
ov d€ Cavra «is Tovs modeuiovs dAovta Gp 
ot Swpedv Siddvar tots éAodat' yphjoba TH adypa 
Ld a“ 4 ~ A %. 32 Zz 
Bo 7 dv BovAwvrar; Kowids ye. Tov 5€ aprored- 
cavTd Te Kal eddoKiyinoavtTa od mpa@Tov pev emt 
otpateias bd Tv avotparevomevwy perpakiwv 
Te Kai Traidwv ev pépe bo Exdotov SoKxe? cot 
a “a ” EA ” Ti Py ,. 
Xpivar orehavwOfvar; 7 ov; “Epouye. Ti Sai; 
deEvwOAvar; Kai todro. *AAAa 768’, ofuat, Fv 
= > 4 > 4 ~ A a 4 To tA / 
€yw, ovucere cot doxet. To motov; To diAqoat 
te Kat gpiAnbjvar bro éxdorov. Ildvrwv, edn, 
edduora: Kal mpootiOnui ye TH vouw, Ews av 
‘ -~ A 
C emi tavryns dou Ths otparetas, pndevi e€etvar am- 
apynPivat, dv av BovAntrar duirctv, iva Kal, éav Tis 
Tov TUXn Ep@v 7) appevos 7) Onrcias, mpoOvporepos 
a ~ > 
} m™pos 70 tapioteia dépew. Kadds, qv 8 eyed. 
~ / 
OT pev yap ayab@ dvr. ydpou Te Erousor TAElovs 
1 van Leeuwen: ss. @é\ovet. 
* The terms are technical. Cf. Laws 943 p ff., Lipsius, 
Das attische Recht (1908), ii. pp. 452 ff. 
> els ros wodeulovs: technical. Cf. inscription in Bulletin 
de corr. hellénique, xii. p. 224, n. 1 rdv addvTwy eis rods 

° &ypa: the word is chosen to give a touch of Spartan, 
or, as we should say, Roman severity. Cf. Sophist 235 c, 



need arises, will most securely escape to safety in 
the train of elder guides.” ‘“‘ I think you are right,” 
he said. ‘‘ But now what of the conduct of war? 
What should be the attitude of the soldiers to one 
another and the enemy? Am I right in my notions 
ornot?”’ “Tell me what notions,” he said. ““ Any- 
one of them who deserts his post, or flings away his 
weapons,’ or is guilty of any similar act of cowardice, 
should be reduced to the artisan or farmer class, 
should he not?” “ By all means.” “‘ And anyone 

‘who is taken alive by the enemy °® we will make a 

present of to his captors, shall we not, to deal with 
their catch* as they please?” “Quite so.” “‘ And 
don’t you agree that the one who wins the prize of 
valour and distinguishes himself shall first be crowned 
by his fellows in the campaign, by the lads and boys 
each in turn?” “Ido.” “ And be greeted with 
the right hand?” “ That, too.” “* But I presume 
you wouldn’t go as far asthis?”’ “ What?” “ That 
he should kiss and be kissed by everyone??”’ “By 
all means,” he said, “‘ and I add to the law the pro- 
vision that during that campaign none whom he 
wishes to kiss be allowed to refuse, so that if one is 
in love with anyone, male or female, he may be the 
more eager to win the prize.” ““ Excellent,” said I, 
“and we have already said that the opportunity of 
marriage will be more readily provided for the good 

Aeschyl. Eumen. 148, Horace, Odes, iii. 5. 33 ff. Plutarch, 
De aud. poet. 30, says that in Homer no Greeks are taken 
prisoners, only Trojans. 

* The deplorable facetiousness of the following recalls the 
vulgarity of Xenophon’s guard-house conversations. It is 
almost the only passage in Plato that one would wish to blot. 
Helvetius, otherwise anything but a Platonist, characteristic- 
ally adopts it, Lange, History of Materialism, ii. p. 86. 



] Tots dAdo Kal aipécers THv TovodtTwv ToAAGKIS 
mapa tods aAXovs Ecovrat, tv’ 6 Tu mAEeioToL ex TOD 
Towovrou ylyvwvrat, <ipyrar 75. Eimopev ydp, 
XV. *AAa pay Kat Kal’ “Opnpov tots Towiobde 
D dikatov Ty Tay véwv daot dyaboi. eat yap 
“Opnpos tov eddoxysjoavra ev TO Toney Vw@TOLoW 
Atavra eon Sunveréeaot yepatpecbar, ws TAavTHV 
oikelay oboav _Tupay TO Barri TE Ka dvdpetw, 
ef fs dua tH tTypdoba Kal THY loxdv avéy OeL. 
‘OpOdrara, edn. Tevodpeba apa, v & eyo, 
Tadrd, Ye ‘Opnpw. Kat yap Hueis ev TE Buctas 
Kal Tots ToLlovToLs Tact Tovs dyabous, Kal? doov 
dv ayaboit daivwvta, Kai Buvors Kat ols viv 8) 
E dAéyopev tipjoopev, mpos d€ Tovrois edpais Te Kat 
Kpéaow ide metous demdeoow, iva dipua. TO TysGy 
dox@pev tos ayabods avdpas te Kal yuvaiKas. 
KdAduora, ebm, A€yets. Elev: tav dé 81) azo- 
Bavovrwy en orparetas és av evdokynoas TE- 
Acurion, 4 dp od mp@Tov pev phoopev Tov xpuood 
yévous elvar; Ildvrwv ye pddvora. “AM od meu 
oopeba ‘Hovddy, émevddv TWes TOD TOLOUTOU ‘yevous 
TedevTHOwWoW, Ws apa 
469 of pev Saisoves ayvol éemryPoviot TeAefovew, 
€aOdol, areEixakor, dvAaKes pepoTwr avOpaiTwv; 
TlevodueBa pev ovv. Avarru86pevor apa Too Aeod, 
TOs xp1) TovSs Sayovious TE kal Betovs tiWévan Kal 
tive diaddpw, ovtw Kal tatty OAjocomev FH av 

@ Jl, vii. 321-322. Cf. also viii. 162, xii. 311. 
> Cf. 415 a. 
¢ Works and Days 121 ff. Stewart, Myths of Plato, p. 437. 



man, and that he will be more frequently selected 
than the others for participation in that sort of thing, 
in order that as many children as possible may be 
born from such stock.” “‘ We have,” he replied. 
XV. “ But, furthermore, we may cite Homer? too 
for the justice of honouring in such ways the valiant 
among our youth. For Homer says that Ajax, who 
had distinguished himself in the war, was honoured 
with the long chine, assuming that the most 
fitting meed for a brave man in the prime of his 
youth is that from which both honour and strength 
will accrue to him.”” “ Most rightly,” he said. “We 
will then,” said I, “‘ take Homer as our guide in this 
at least. We, too, at sacrifices and on other like 
occasions, will reward the good so far as they have 
proved themselves good with hymns and the other 
privileges of which we have just spoken, and also 
with seats of honour and meat and full cups, so as to 
combine physical training with honour for the good, 
both men and women.” ‘“‘ Nothing could be better,” 
he said. “Very well; and of those who die on cam- 
paign, if anyone’s death has been especially glorious, 
shall we not, to begin with, affirm that he belongs to 
the golden race®?” “ By all means.” “ And shall 
we not believe Hesiod who tells us that when any- 
one of this race dies, so it is that they become 
Hallowed spirits dwelling on earth, averters of evil, 
Guardians watchful and good of articulate-speaking 
“We certainly shall believe him.” ‘“‘ We will inquire 
of Apollo,? then, how and with what distinction we 
are to bury men of more than human, of divine, 
qualities, and deal with them according to his 

4 Cf. 427 B-c, 


eEnyjrar; Ti 8 od péddopev; Kat rov Aourdv 
57) xpdvov as Saudvev ottw Oeparredoomev Te Kal 
B mpocxurvycopev adtadv tas OnKas: tadta Sé€ Tadra 
vopuodpev, éray tis yips n TUL ay Tpome 
teheuTion TOV dao av SiadepovTws ev TH Biw 
> 0 ‘ AG Po Ad ~ ” / Py , 
ayaboi Kpibdow; ixavov yodv, edn. Ti dai; 
mpos Tovs oAEulovs mas moijcovow Hiv ot 
atpatt@rar; To motov 84; Ilparov pev avdpa- 
modiopod mépu SoKet Sixatov “EAAnvas ‘EAnvidas 
modes avdpamodilecbar, 7) pnd’ aAAn emetpérew 
Kata TO Suvatov Kat todto ebilew, tod “EXAy- 
Cvucod yévous deidecbar, edAaBovpévovs tiv b70 
~ 7 / o A f ” 
tav BapBapwv Sovrciav; “OdAw Kal mavti, edn, 
Suadeper To heideobar. Myde “EAAnva dpa dobAov 
> ~ 4 > A aA La @ 
éxrijoba pare adtods tots te aAXows “EAAnow 
ottw EvpBovredew; Tldvy peév obv, &dyn: paddov 
y’ dv odv ottw mpos tovs BapBdpovs tpézow7o, 
éavtav 8 dméyowro. Ti dai; oxvdcvew, qv & 
> 4 4 , ‘ iA > \ 
ey, Tods terevTHcavtas mAnY Srdwv, emeidav 
viknowow,  KaAds éxer; 7 od mpdpacw pev Tots 
D SeiAois Eyer put) mpos TOV paydpevov lévat, WS TL 
trav Sedvrwy dpavtas, otav wept tov téeOvedra 
/ \ \ »” / ‘\ A 
Kumtdalwor, moda S€ 78n otparémeda dia THY 
f ¢ ‘ > / A / > 
rovavTny daprayny amwAeto; Kat pada. “Av- 
4 A > a \ A ‘ 
eAcvbepov d¢ od Soxet Kai PiAoypratov vekpov 
ovAGy, Kal yuvatkeias Te Kal opiKpas Svavolas To 
mroA€wov vouilew Td cHpa Tob TeOveTos anomTa- 

@ ginyfrac: cf. 427 c. 

> rdv ordy 5h xpdvov: cf. Pindar in Meno 81 c, Phaedo 
81 a. 

¢ For this Pan-Hellenic feeling ¢f. Xen. Ages. 7. 6, 
Hellen. i. 6. 14, Aeschines ii. 115, Isoc. Panegyricus. 



response.” ‘ How can we do otherwise?”’ ‘“‘ And 
ever after’ we will bestow on their graves the tend- 
ance and worship paid to spirits divine. And we will 
practise the same observance when any who have 
been adjudged exceptionally good in the ordinary 
course of life die of old age or otherwise?” “That 
will surely be right,” he said. “ But again, how will 
our soldiers conduct themselves toward enemies ?’” 
“In what respect?” “First, in the matter of 
making slaves of the defeated, do you think it right 
for Greeks to reduce Greek cities‘ to slavery, or rather 
that, so far as they are able, they should not suffer 
any other city to do so, but should accustom Greeks 
to spare Greeks, foreseeing the danger? of enslave- 
ment by the barbarians ?”’ “ Sparing them is wholly 
and altogether the better,” said he. ‘‘ They are not, 
then, themselves to own Greek slaves, either, and 
they should advise the other Greeks not to?” “‘ By 
all means,” he said ; “ at any rate in that way they 
would be more likely to turn against the barbarians 
and keep their hands from one another.”” “* And how 
about stripping the dead after victory of anything 
except their weapons: is that well? Does it not fur- 
nish a pretext to cowards not to advance on the living 
foe, as if they were doing something needful when 
poking * about the dead? Has not this snatching at 
the spoils ere now destroyed many anarmy?”’ “Yes, 
indeed.” “‘ And don’t you think it illiberal and 
greedy to plunder a corpse, and is it not the mark 
of a womanish and petty / spirit to deem the body of 
the dead an enemy when the real foeman has flown 

* For the following ¢f. Laws 693 a, and Gomperz, Greek 
Thinkers, iii. p. 275. 

* xurrdfwor: ef. Blaydes on Aristoph. Nubes 509. 

4 Cf. Juvenal, Sat. xiii. 189-191. 



pévov tod exOpod, AeAoumdtos 5é @ emoAcuear; 7} 
E olet te Suddopov Spav rods todto mowbdvtas THv 
~ a a / n” ~ ’ U 
Kuv@v, at Tots AiBous ols av BAnbador xarerraivovat, 
Tod BaAdvros" odx amTTOMEvaL; Ovde opLKpov, eon. 
*Earéov dpa tas vexpoavAtas Kat Tas TOV dvaupe- 
cewv duaxwddoeis; *Earéov peévror, edn, v7 Ata. 
XVI. Ovdse pryjv mov mpos Ta iepad Ta OmAa 
” 7 > / »” \ A ~ 
oicopev ws avabyacovres, GAAws Te Kal Ta TOV 

470 EMiver, €dv Te Hiv Heng Tis mpos Tovs ne 
“EM nvas edvoias: padov 6 € Kal poBnodpcba, 
TL piaopa a mpos tepov Ta ToLabTa amo TOV Siccdie 
depen, €av juy} TL 57) 6 6 Oeds dAAo Aéyn- ‘Op86rara, 
én. Té Sai; yijs Te THATEWS THs “EXnuiis 
kal oiKL@v cumpncews motov Ti got Spdcovow 
ot oTpaTi@Tat mpos Tovs ToAepious ; Lob, édy, 
ddgav dropavopevov Hdews av dcodoaye. "Epot 
Bev toivuv, iv 8 eyd, Soxet todtwv pndérepa 
movetv, aAAa Tov ééTevov Kapmov adaipetobar Kat 
e ¢ , ’ , , , 
dy évexa, Bovde cot rAE€yw; lave ye. Paiverat 
plot, woarrep Kat dvopalerar duo Tatra ovopara., 
TOAELOS TE Kal oTdats, OUTW Kal elvar Svo0, dvTa 

1 The mss. vary between Baddvtos and Bdddovros, which 
Aristotle, who refers to the passage (het. 1406 b 33), 
seems to have read. It might be important in the class- 
room to distinguish the continuous present from the matter- 
of-fact aorist. 

® dmorrauévov: both Homer and Sappho so speak of the 
soul as flitting away. 

> The body is only the instrument of the soul. Cf. 
Socrates’ answer to the question, ‘How shall we bury 
you?” Phaedo 115 cff. and the elaboration of the idea in 
Alc. I. 129 ©, whence it passed into European literature. 

° Quoted by Aristotle, Rhet. 1406 b. Epictetus iii. 19. 4 
complains that nurses encourage children to strike the stone 
on which they stumble. -Cf. also Lucan vi. 220-223. Otto, 

— i R 


away? and left behind only the instrument? with which 
he fought ? Do you see any difference between such 
conduct and that of the dogs’ who snarl at the 
stones that hit them but don’t touch the thrower ? ” 
“Not the slightest.”” “‘ We must abandon, then, the 
plundering of corpses and the refusal to permit their 
burial.” “By heaven, we certainly must,” he said. 

XVI. “And again, we will not take weapons to 
the temples for dedicatory ° offerings, especially the 
weapons of Greeks, if we are at all concerned to 
preserve friendly relations with the other Greeks. 
Rather we shall fear that there is pollution in 
bringing such offerings to the temples from our 
kind unless in a case where the god bids other- 
wise’” “Most rightly,” he said. “ And in the 
matter of devastating the land of Greeks and burn- 
ing their houses, how will your soldiers deal with their 
enemies.” “I would gladly hear your opinion of 
that.” ‘‘In my view,” said I, “they ought to do 
neither, but confine themselves to taking away the 
annual harvest. Shall I tell you why?” “ Do.” 
“In my opinion, just as we have the two terms, war 
and faction, so there are also two things, distinguished 

Sprichwérter der Romer, p. 70, cites Pliny, N.H. xxix. 102, 
and Pacuv. v. 38, Ribb. Trag.2_ Cf. Montaigne i. 4, “ Ainsin 
emporte les bestes leur rage 4 s’attaquer a la pierre et au fer 
qui les a blecées.”’ 

@ Plato as a boy may have heard of the Thebans’ refusal 
to allow the Athenians to bury their dead after Delium. 
Cf. Thucyd. iv. 97-101, and Eurip. Supplices. 

* For the practice ef. Aeschyl. Septem 275-279 and Ag. 
577-579. Italian cities and American states have restored to 
one another the flags so dedicated from old wars. Cf. Cie. 
De invent. ii. 70 “at tamen aeternum inimicitiarum monu- 
mentum Graios de Graiis statuere non oportet.” 

For similar caution cf. on 427 B-c, 



emi dvoiv tivoiv Siadopaiv. Aéyw 8€ ta So 7d 
pev olicetov Kal cvyyeves, TO de aAAdTpiov Kal 
oOvetov. ent pev oop Th 708 oixetov éxOpa ardous 
KéxAnrat, emi dé TH 708 aAAorpiov méXepos. Kat 
ovdev ye, epn, amo Tpdmov Aéyets. “Opa 57 Kat 
el Tdd€ mpos Tpo7rov dey. pypt yap TO per 
*EXNnvicov ‘yévos avTo at’T@ oiKelov elvan Kal 
Evyyevés, TH S5é BapBapixd GOveidv re Kal Gdd‘- 
TpLov. Kadds ye, edn. “EXAnvas pev dpa Bap- 
Bdpous Kat PBapBdpovs “EAAnot modcepciv payo- 
pévous TE pjoopev Kal 7roAepious gvoe elvar, 
Kal 7oAcov THY ExOpav TadTHv KAnTEoV" “EMqvas 
d¢€ “EAAnow, otav tt towodro dpaat, duoc pev 
dirous elvar, vooeiv 8’ ev TH tovodtw THv “EAAdda 
kal oraoudleww, Ka oTdow TIHV TovadTny €x9pav 
KAntéov. "Ey per, eon», Evyxwp@ ovTw vomuileu. 
Ukdzrev 51}; elmov, OTL ev TH viv oporoyoupery 
ordoet, Omrov av Tt Towobrov yevnran Kal dar} 

mods, eav éxdrepor éxatépwr Téuvwow aypods Kat 
oikias eumump@ow, ws adArtrnpiddns te SoKel 7 
oTdots elvat Kal ovdéTepor atTt@v diAomoAbes: 
od yap av mote éroAuwv tiv Tpodov Te Kai pn- 
Tépa Keipew adda peérpiov elvar tods Kapmods 

« I have so translated technically in order to imply that 
the Plato of the Republic is already acquainted with 
the terminology of the Sophist. Cf. Unity of Plato’s 
Thought, notes 375 and 377, followed by Wilamowitz, 
Platon, i. p. 504. But most editors take d:agopdé here as 
dissension, and construe “applied to the disagreements of 
two things,” which may be right. Cf. Sophist 228 a 
ordow ... Thy TOO dice cuyyevods Ex Tivos SiapOopas Stapopar. 

> Plato shared the natural feelings of Isocrates, Demo- 
sthenes, and all patriotic Greeks. Of. Isoc. Panegyr. 157, 
184, Panath. 163; Menex. 237 ff., Laws 692 c and 693 a. 




by two differentiae.* The two things I mean are the 
friendly and kindred on the one hand and the alien 
and foreign on the other. Now the term employed 
for the hostility of the friendly is faction, and for that 
of the alien is war.” “‘ What you say is in nothing 
beside the mark,” he replied. ‘‘ Consider, then, if 
this goes tothe mark. [ affirm that the Hellenic race 
is friendly to itself and akin, and foreign and alien to 
the barbarian.” “ Rightly,” he said. “Weshallthen 
say that Greeks fight and wage war with barbarians, 
and barbarians with Greeks, and are enemies by 
nature,’ and that war is the fit name for this enmity 
and hatred. Greeks, however, we shall say, are still 
by nature the friends of Greeks when they act in this 
way, but that Greece is sick in that case and divided 
by faction, and faction is the name we must give 
to that enmity.” “I will allow you that habit of 
speech,” he said. “‘ Then observe,” said I, “ that 
when anything of this sort occurs in faction, as the 
word is now used, and a state is divided against itself, 
if either party devastates the land and burns the 
houses of the other such factional strife is thought 
to be an accursed thing and neither party to be true 
patriots. Otherwise, they would never have endured 
thus to outrage their nurse and mother. But the 
moderate and reasonable thing is thought to be that 
the victors shall take away the crops of the van- 

It is uncritical then with Newman (op. cit. p. 430) and many 
others to take as a recantation of this passage the purely 
logical observation in Polit. 262 p that Greek and barbarian 
is an unscientific dichotomy of mankind. Cf. on the 
whole question the dissertation of Friedrich Weber, Platons 
Stellung zu den Barbaren. 

© Cf. supra 414 8, Menex. 237 5, Tim. 40 8, Laws 740 
a, Aeschyl. Septem 16. 

VOL. I 2K 497 


E adatpeiobar tots Kpatodo. Tay Kpatoupévwv, Kat 
Siavociabar ws SiadAaynoopéevwy Kal obK det 70- 
Aeunodvrwy. IloAd yap, bn, iepwrépwv adrn 7 
dudvoia exeivns. Ti dé dn; edyv: tv od modw 
oixilers, ody “EAAnvis €or; Act y’ adrjv, cor 
Odxodv Kai ayabol Te Kal tjwepor Ecovtar; Udddpa 
ye. “Add’ od didredAAnves odd€ olketav THY “EAAdda 


tep@v; Kai ofddpa ye. Odxodv iv mpos tovs 

471 “EXAnvas Siadopay ais oikelovs otdow Wyioovrat 

Kai odd€ dvoydcover moAcuov; Ov ydp. Kai ds 
diaAAaynoduevor dpa Sioicovrat; Ildvy pev odv. 
Etvpevas 8) owdpovwotow, otk emi SovdActa 
KoAdlovtes 08d’ ex’ dACOpw, cwdhpovortal dyvtes, 
ov mroAgutot. Odtws, é6n. Odd’ dpa tHv “ENAdda 
"EAnves dvtes Kepodow, oddé oiKnoes ep- 
mphaovow, ovde dporoyjcovaw ev éexdoTn mode 
mdvras €x8povs atrois elvat, Kat avdpas Kal 
yuvatkas Kat matdas, GAN’ dAlyous del exOpods 
Brovs aitiovs tis Suadopds: Kal Sia tadta mavra 
ovTe THY yy eVeAjcovar Keipew adTav, ws Pidwv 
TOY TOAAMY, ovTE oikias avatpémew, GAA pméxpt 
TovTOUV TrowjoovTar THY Siadhopav, expt od av ob 
aitio. avayxacb@ow bo THv avaitiwv adyovvTwv 

@ Cf. Epist. 354 a, Herod. ii. 178, Isoc. Phil. 122, 
Panegyr. 96, Evag. 40, Panath. 241. The word is still 
significant for international politics, and must be retained 
in the translation. 

> Cf. Newman, op. cit. p. 143. 

¢ The same language was frequently used in the recent 
World War, but the practice was sometimes less civilized 
than that which Plato recommends. Hobhouse (Mind in 
Evolution, p. 384), writing earlier, said, ‘“‘ Plato’s conclusions 



quished, but that their temper shall be that of men 
who expect to be reconciled and not always to wage 
war.” ‘‘ That way of feeling,” he said, “ is far less 
savage than the other.” “ Well, then,” said I, “ is 
not the city that you are founding to be a Greek 
city?” “It must be,” he said. “ Will they then 
not be good and gentle?”’ “Indeed they will.” 
“ And won't they be philhellenes,? lovers of Greeks, 
and will they not regard all Greece as their own and 
not renounce their part in the holy places common to 
all Greeks?” “ Most certainly.” “ Will they not 
then regard any difference with Greeks who are their 
own people as a form of faction and refuse even to 
speak of itas war?” ‘“‘ Mostcertainly.” “ And they 
will conduct their quarrels always looking forward to 
a reconciliation?” ‘“‘ By all means.” ‘‘ They will 
correct them, then, for their own good, not chastis- 
ing them with a view to their enslavement ® or their 
destruction, but acting as correctors, not as enemies.” 
“ They will,” he said. ‘‘ They will not, being Greeks, 
ravage Greek territory nor burn habitations, and they 
will not admit that in any city all the population are 
their enemies, men, women and children, but will 
say that only a few at any time are their foes,’ 
those, namely, who are to blame for the quarrel. 
And on all these considerations they will not be 
willing to lay waste the soil, since the majority are 
their friends, nor to destroy‘the houses, but will 
carry the conflict only to the point of compelling 
the guilty to do justice by the pressure of the 

(Rep. 469-471) show how narrow was the conception of 
humanitarian duties in the fourth century.” It is, I think, 
only modern fancy that sees irony in the conclusion: “ treat- 
ing barbarians as Greeks now treat Greeks.” 



Sobvat Sieny. "Eye pev, dn, oporoya ouTw 
deiv mpos Tods evavtious Tovs TpeTepous moNiras 
mpoopepeabar: mpos 5é tods BapBapous ws viv ot 
“EAAnves Tpos adAjAous. T0Gpev 57) Kal TobTov 
C Tov vojLov Tots pvrakt, pate yhv Tépvew pyre 
oikias eumrumpavan; Odpev, epn, Kal exew ye 
KaAds Tatra Te Kat Ta. mpoatev. 
XVII. *AAAa yap pow doxeis, @ LusKpares, édv 
Tis ool Ta Tovadra. eTmLTpeT™ Aye, oddémore 
prnobjcecbat 6 6 ev 7@ mpoobev TapwadsLevos mavra. 
TavTa etpnKas, TO as Suvari) avTn uy) ToAreta 
yeveobar Kal Tiva Tpomov mote OvvaTy: ézet ore ye, 
ei yevowro, mavT av ein ayaba mode i) yévouro, 
Kal @ ov Tapadectzevs eya A€yen, 6 OTL Kal Tots TO- 
D Xenlous dpior’ av pdxowro TO Hora amoXeizrew 
aAAjAous, yuyvboKovtés te Kal dvaKxadodvres 
TatTa Ta ovdomata eavTovs, adeAdovs, TaTépas, 
viels, ef d€ Kal TO OAV cvoTparetowTo, €iTe Kal 
ev TH avTH Td€e elre Kal dmobev emuiteTaypevor, 
poBov Te eveka Tots €x8pots Kal el qoTe TUS 
avayen Bonfeias, oid” or tavTn mavTH 
apayou dv elev" kal olKOL ye a mapanetmerat 
ayald, doa dv ety avTots, Opa” add’ ws €uoo 
E opohoyobyros mdvra Tatra, OTL €in dv Kal dda. 
ye pupia., él yevouro ” TmoAuTeta atrn, pnKete 
mAciw mepl avriis A€ye, aAAa TobTo avTo 70n Tet 
wpa mas adtovs metOew, ws Suvatov Kal 
472 Suvarov, Ta 8° GAAa xalpew eOpev. "E€aidvns ye 

@ It is a mistaken ingenuity that finds a juncture between 
two distinct versions here. 
> ravr’ , . . dyabd: idiomatically colloquial. Cf. Polit. 



suffering of the innocent.” “I,” he said, “ agree 
that our citizens ought to deal with their Greek 
opponents on this wise, while treating barbarians 
as Greeks now treat Greeks.” “Shall we lay 
down this law also, then, for our guardians, that 
they are not to lay waste the land or burn the 
houses?” ‘* Let us so decree,” he said, “‘ and assume 
that this and our preceding prescriptions are right. 
XVII. “But*I fear, Socrates, that,ifyouare allowed 
to go on in this fashion, you will never get to speak of 
thematter you put asideinordertosay allthis,namely, 
the possibility of such a polity coming into existence, 
and the way in which it could be brought to pass. I 
too am ready to admit that if it could be realized 
everything would be lovely ° for the state that had it, 
and I will add what you passed by, that they would 
also be most successful in war because they would 
be least likely to desert one another, knowing and 
addressing each other by the names of brothers, 
fathers, sons. And if the females should also join 
in their campaigns, whether in the ranks or mar- 
shalled behind to intimidate the enemy,’ or as re- 
serves in case of need, I recognize that all this too 
would make them irresistible. And at home, also, 
I observe all the benefits that you omit to mention. 
But, taking it for granted that I concede these and 
countless other advantages, consequent on the realiza- 
tion of this polity, don’t labour that point further ; 
but let us at once proceed to try to convince our- 
selves of just this, that it is possible and how it is 
possible, dismissing everything else.” “This is a 
284 s, Laws 711 pv, 757 pv, 780 pv, Aristoph, Acharn. 978, 

982, Frogs 302. 
© Cf. Laws 806 s. 



, > > 7 Ad eA > la 74 
ov, hv 8 eyw, worep KaTadpopny eromjow emt 

tov Adyov pov, Kal od ovyyvyvwoKets oTpay- 
yevoevw.’ tows yap odK olafa, dre poyts pot 
Tw OUw KUpate exduydrTt vov TO péytoToV Kal 
yarerwtatov THs tpikuplas éemdyets, 6 emedav 
ions TE Kal aKkovons, TavU ovyyvwpny E€Ets, OTL 
elkOTWS Apa WKVOUY TE Kal eded0iKN OUTW Tapa- 
dofov Aéyew Adyov Te Kal émyerpety SvacKometv. 
a + »” ~ / f 

Ocw ar, edn, Towadra, mei Aeyns, ATTov 
aebicer bp’ av Tpos TO py) elmreiv, TH Suva 
ylyvecbar atrn 7 TroNureta. adAAa Aéye Kat py 
dud piBe. Otkodiv, jv 8 ey, mp@rov pev tode 
Ld ¢ a ~ 

xe?) dvapvnoOivar, OTL Tpets Cyrobvres duKato- 
ovvny oldv €or Kal adduxiay dedpo TROMED. Xp: 
aAAa ti TobTS y’; edn. Oddev- GAX’ eav edpapev 

or > , > \ » ‘ , 
oidv €or Sixavoodvyn, dpa Kal avdpa tov Sdixatov 
> 4 \ ~ > ~ > 4 / 
aéimoonev pndev Setv adrijs exeivns Siadepew, 
dAAd mavtaxh Towtrov elvar, ofov SiKarood 
€oTlv, 7) dyaTnoopnev, eav 6 Te eyyttata avris 7 
kal mAciota tTa&v aAAwy exeivns petexn; OdTws, 

1 grpayyevoudvy, ‘loitering.’ A rare word. See Blaydes 

on Aristoph. Acharn. 126. Most ss. read less aptly orpa- 
Tevouev@, “my stratagem.” 

@ &omep marks the figurative use as ria in Aeschines, Tim, 
135 rwa Kcatradpounv. 

» Of. Introd. p. xvii. The third wave, sometimes the ninth, 
was proverbially the greatest. Cf. Euthydem. 293 a, Lucan 
v. 672 “‘decimus dictu mirabile fluctus,’’ and Swinburne: 

Who swims in sight of the great third wave 

That never a swimmer shall cross or climb. 
ouyyyeuny : L. & S. wrongly with dr, “to acknowledge 
that 45,3 

@ Cf. Introd. p. xii and noted, Plato seems to overlook 
the fact that the search was virtually completed in the 
fourth book. 



sudden assault,? indeed,” said I, “‘ that you have made 
on my theory, without any regard for my natural 
hesitation. Perhaps you don’t realize that when I 
have hardly escaped the first two waves, you are now 
rolling up against me the ‘great third wave?’ of 
paradox, the worst of all. When you have seen and 
heard that, you will be very ready to be lenient,° 
recognizing that I had good reason after all for 
shrinking and fearing to enter upon the discussion 
of so paradoxical a notion.” ‘“‘The more such 
excuses you offer,” he said, “the less you will be 
released by us from telling in what way the realization 
of this polity is possible. Speak on, then, and do not 
put usoff.” ‘ The first t